




^ u. r 

* ,6 

^ . 0 N C , 


0 * X _ 

r Cr < 
0 * 
s 




' '^A V * 


4 « >) * . ( aO 

$&&■% • '%■ $ « 
?* ,^V<v z o1) 


^ " *o o x ; ^ 

v o> ^ $ 

? > KV- - 


*0 o' ° %7tfj 

*« * %- j c - .h * » 

i., .o ~ '>w s v »>* i. ***av# % * n o 

«v a 4 C ■ <0 <y "> cvJ' 'C' u .0 

^ <s ^ ^ r ^ r > N 0 y ' u | \ w s 

^ \0 s ~ O O V * 0 * ^ v 0 V S S 

% * V& ' •*» . r <>5, % . A V ' <* 

X * '%■ * <?V> \V <* jA . V .4) r ■>> A * ■?* 

^ ,^ x - # 'v¥ % / ** 

^ -^r-v^ , - z 

3 ^f. 




r~> 


* ^ , 
z / <; 

c*> «<* "‘ "==1 ~ .\A' '-^/i. o •'/ 

' <& * ',*&§?S - \ 

//( **'' y.111, '\ '°" 1 


\" ' ",> «S y 'i . ^- v ' ✓ '«§mj 4 f Si V 

* * s S ,\ x . I g '?/> <r o»i'* -^0 N / * * * S v \\ 

V <1 ' * « o- .o" V 0 N C 4 <S> Vo v 

f^ .v\^yT^2_ ' => ^ -O X- -f w 

.-» . v _ <xV\al ^ /■ 'P, i p ^ ,^?k \\!/A / yz^ > . v- v 

: ° o' 





._ . , - 

v \ A y* N>r > \ 

V O ^ t> O. 

i» i0 o, (, ij o, v 

v'\ 



b 0 ' = 


' '' ^ ~ C P- * 

C* y <■ o- X r> it. -I 

.., ^ *••»«»' y v . *>.» , 

* %/ ^ “ 

" % l 

r C V o- a^/yTPn-. 1 ^ 0 ■> _sSNx ^ 

^ ^ A' 0 ^d ///Z 2 -^ ? . < 

■f-*. \V *» \y y 

“ O 0 X ° 

^ <* 

mrmNVi ® A Ap 1 ' 

^ 7 , ~^UA/-^ * C\ _ ^ > \X* ^ <<■ 

4- “£'£<*' ^ « v ^ O ^ * vL*' cp L v 

• °' ^ '' 1 ' / v ^s; ° * °' v'V' * °, % * • 1 ' ■* o 

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ AT 

? z ^ - 7 ^ ^ «? 

.v\ X> ,r *f> O \'/s<' .V° “ 0*7 A o <\V 4 / v -. 

^ -V V jvw * v> v » * or 

^ « S S A i i if °y» y 0 , H ^ (G <f \ s /\ ^ 

AAmA A % % * *,/ v* 11 * ♦ • 

a) ^ # 77, ^ . <«. ^vXv Yk’^, y '^, a^ ' v 

k i> ^ ^ C "nV ; : Tfe , *f>> V7 

* ° o x : \ A A, - v 

o5 ^ - rf^&rnrJ * \° °^. * 


1 ^ct. 





0c ^. 



*y "xv 



'J N 




















0 o V 


v• • ■ y;•■ ..vX'• ■ ■ yx ; • s ■ 

© o x : A • v * °o r 

* \°°x. * ^ >- -^>x: ;-jr „ 

JV • -’‘/I ’ -.V’ • • ; *> x v 

7 - (3 55 ^ * ** ^ 'fX r (? Sj 51 . A~& v 

.X <A * * <?X A * jA^f/h, XX * 


^ X 




; d? x 



.0 x. 

v X/ A. -. v 

■ j. ■sna* ’ *> \ y * 

^ / V ^ \' * t.O >/ /) 1 ^ - l \ 

■*’* A v * v " * X 0 X ‘' 

.• ^ x _ 1 <s> (r * 

i> v «s 

s ‘X v ° 

.-- * °o 

X x - 

> ^v- X-f, « 




N c k '<& ' * * s A^ * v 1 8 * ^b 

* *f> A A „/v^-, -» X5 

y A A 

v* 




_ X w V •, , 

A O C' *> N ^j<s^ 0 ol 

» <0* O b 0 • A* 

<x ^ / A. ^ N V t *■ 

.9 k aV,*/* £x v * 

% Jr * ^5^ * x 

<y S 



\ y </X 

*> * > * >S » a v . 

k ^ X a O- y 0, x* ,0 V oN r <X '/ »< 

c?' ,‘'*‘*/^ ' X X ' * *, °o '-°’ c ** •*- 

.0 o. 



X° °X. 



\y v 

-< o 0 X 


A. ' 



v ° A' rf- 

-6 % ’*' x X ‘»/1 >•’ 

A ''X'xV" v'V ‘»,, > 

x (A ^ 

A 




■o' -"' " */X '**' .#' V 

■s' \ r- ^AXJHXL /• 'Pf Vp 

o o X ® Xv ; \ * A ‘ 

x°°- * 

;x J > ^ 


o .vx’ 


-1/ X< 
XX ^0 , 

^ V I B i, f b 


v I -1 




o 



✓ N >x> 3 ~' « O • 

^ ^ 3 H 0 ' \^ X 

C> V 

^ 'P. r 

/- x- X v -X 


->•- -ft <a> ry L x 

/V ^ r y >t _ . i> 4 v 

*"xV’ v'V n 7-X^x 

.^X .A A XX, . 

y \ ' » X X -i flV - v> 

* ••°' <- *"«x/ ...., % y -‘* 0 « 0 ..—-,x 1 

' -y / v-xx 0 . 

* ' • 'X' 


X * 




« ' 

^ *t, ' ^ 

vV rf. ^J Jr ,* s > . 

xxxTo’X#' X , 'Yrx *'-' 0 

o> ,>"'■ X 0 ^° ,Xi*, ^ 



Xy CV V * 



N*. s ^ 


' _ a 

'v " ^ X v *'y6!S 

° X # 

Z 2 

A V * %r^ f 


' ^O o x 

^ ?S ^} o ^ 


L ’ S X. A * &i(!//Z*, + 

' ; x 

; ■ \°x 

et- c 




*0 


A 














































/? ? ^ 




















/ 



FIRST LORO 


MAYOR OF K.GNOON. 















































































































































































































































































IaSc 


rzrzL 


a 


A 


r 





OF 


Ek&urus Lotte' Manors 

“'fev ^ * 


Aj\I> 


p r-nnni rtF^mtrhin. 


WITH 


A BRIEF Hi STORY OF THE OTY OF 

1 '■§£ oiuVti. 


lUso a Chronological ?M of thf lords |lllspors& Sheriffs 
of fSmdon and JtliCtMjear, from the earliest period to % 
ptmitX tune. 






• // l A S(e>C 


•- 







7 





I 




Oto c | V" L? 
c o r 'U.d-0, 



N 











PREFACE. 


The biography of the most illustrious and distinguished 
of the chief magistrates of the ancient and renowned City 
of London, must possess the greatest interest, not only 
to its own citizens, but to the subjects generally, of the 
vast and extended British Empire, of which it is the 
capital, as well as to their descendants in the colonies, 
and also to the citizens of the United States of America. 

The Lords Mayors of London are the property of 
History, and are closely connected with the ancient 
chivalry of the Sovereigns of England, as well as with 
the gallant exploits of her most renowned warriors, and 
of her ablest diplomacy; for, in former times, the ambas¬ 
sadors to foreign courts have been selected from among 
the Lords Mayors of London. Sir William Walworth, 
to whose biography we refer our readers, is associated 
in our memories with the rebellion of Wat Tyler, and 
stimulates us to courage and loyalty in defence of the 
just rights of the Crown. Sir Richard Whittington brings 
back the careworn mind of age to the innocence and 
playfulness of infancy, when his “ most puissant catte” 
supplied food for mirth, and his own adventures im¬ 
pressed the value of industry, morality, and integrity, 
on our minds. Sirs John Crosby and Edmund Shaw 
remind us of the usurpation of the crown by the house 






























PREFACE. 


♦ • • 

Vlll 

of Lancaster, and of the wars of the Roses, which deso¬ 
lated England for more than a century, until “ the winter 
of our discontent was made glorious summer by the sun 
of York.” The name of Gresham is associated with the 
Royal Exchange, which Sir Richard projected, and his 
son, Sir Thomas, founded and built. With the name of 
Sir Thomas Gresham, who founded Gresham College, is 
inseparably connected the blessings of extended education 
in the sciences of Divinity, Astronomy, Music, Geometry, 
Law, Medicine, and Rhetoric. 

Other illustrious names amongst the civic functionaries 
remind us of the numerous stirring events in our domestic 
history; such as the reformation of religion from the 
superstitious and cruel persecutions of former times; the 
grand rebellion, with the restoration of the church and 
monarchy; the Fire and Plague of London, with the 
consequent loss of life and property; the Revolution, in 
which the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of that day took 
so conspicuous a part; and the many wonderful events 
which have rendered the history of our country so re¬ 
nowned, both in arts and arms, and in the extension of 
commerce and manufactures. The biography of men asso¬ 
ciated with all these circumstances and events, must be 
interesting to all sorts of readers, and convey much real 
as well as entertaining information to their minds. We 
trust, then, that our exertions will not fail to be appre¬ 
ciated. 























INTRODUCTION. 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 

It has been deemed advisable to preface the present 
volume of the “ Lives of Eminent Lords Mayors 
of the City of London/’ with a brief sketch of the 
history of the city itself. The advantages arising 
from the introduction of such a chapter in the pre¬ 
sent work, will be sufficiently obvious, if one or two 
instances alone are stated. It must be evident that 
the life of any great public man can only be properly 
understood by a corresponding knowledge of the 
history of the age in which he lived, and of the 
circumstances which called him, perhaps, from the 
humble obscurity of a private and even menial life, 

“ To read his history in a nation’s eyes.” 

To enter into such a review of the exigences of a 
nation at these crises, would interrupt, but too often, 
the thread of the narrative which belongs to indivi¬ 
dual character, and the preservation of which, if we 
would arrive at the unity of the man’s character, 
must be held as pertinaciously as the mystic cord 

B 









10 THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 

which led to the bower.of “Fair Rosamond.” By 
the adoption of the present chapter, these frequent 
deviations from the biographical narrative will be 
avoided; and whilst a clue is afforded to the gene¬ 
ral tenor of national history, the compact thread of 
individual history will remain inviolate. It is not 
pretended in the present sketch to attempt anything 
like a history at large of England or of the city of 
London itself, but to pass in rapid review over the 
series of leading events in the history of the city, 
and to furnish a narrative that will throw some light 
upon the actions of the eminent men whose lives 
are chronicled in the subsequent pages of this work. 

The foundation of the cities of remote ages, un¬ 
less attended with some peculiar historical incident, 
is a matter of dubious investigation, even in relation 
to civilized countries ; but in relation to countries in 
a state of semi-barbarism, like our own, at the time 
of the Roman invasion, the difficulties assume a 
far more serious character. A tribe of half savage 
men, settling down in the valley of the Thames, at a 
particular spot, to avail themselves of the advantages 
of the stream, whether as furnishing the means of 
existence or defence, can hardly be expected to 
constitute an event, the date of which can be easily 
defined in history. Such difficulties attach to the 
establishment of the city of London; and the remote 
age at which its foundation took place, has given 
rise, in later ages, to endless disputes as to the time 
of, and circumstances that attended that foundation. 
























THE HISTOKY OF LONDON. 


11 


Geoffrey of Monmouth, ascribed its origin to Brutus, 
a descendant of Eneas, of mythological celebrity; 
and crude as this theory was, we find it pleaded by 
the mayor and aldermen of the city itself, before 
King Henry VI., in order to establish for the city 
a precedence, in point of antiquity, even over ancient 
Rome itself. The first mention, however, of the ex¬ 
istence of the ancient Londinium, occurs in Tacitus, 
who tells us that the Roman General, Suetonius 
Paulinus, who was then engaged in the conquest of 
the Isle of Anglesea, having received intimation of 
the revolt of the Britons, under Boadicea, Queen of 
the Iceni, marched to London, which had, even then 
(a.d. 64 ) attained some celebrity as a mercantile 
town. The probability in fact is, that a village ex¬ 
isted at the time of the conquest, by Julius Caesar, 
but it is highly improbable that it had attained any 
degree of importance at that age. Nor was it till 
long after, that London assumed the character of a 
fortified town ; for w r e find it abandoned by Suetonius 
on his return from Wales, as untenable for a place 
of defence. The city, abandoned to the lavages of 
the Britons, was pillaged and burnt, and the inhabi¬ 
tants, without distinction of age or sex, destioyed. 
It may be necessary to remark, in ordei to account 
for this; that the greater number of its inhabitants 
were, in all probability, Romans, and consisted of 
merchants and adventurers, who had left Rome to 
establish themselves here. Numbers of mercenary 
Britons were doubtless established here, and the fact 







12 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


alone of their living under the protection of the 
Romans would be sufficient to arouse the wrathful 
anger of their more patriotic countrymen, who would 
regard their allegiance to the invader as an act of 
the foulest treachery. It was not until the period 
varying from the latter end of the third to the be¬ 
ginning of the fifth centuries (for historians have not 
been able satisfactorily to settle the exact period), 
that the great work of fortifying London, by sur¬ 
rounding it by a wall, was attempted by the Ro¬ 
mans ; and, in the mean time, the inhabitants, who 
subsequently again settled at this place, were ex¬ 
posed to the attacks of every marauding force. 
The general opinion is, that the wall of the city was 
begun in the reign of Valentinian I., at which time 
the contests between the wild inhabitants and the 
Romans were carried on with unparalleled vigour. 
Theodosius, the elder, however, at this juncture, 
arrived in Britain with a strong force; and having 
defeated the allied forces of the Saxons, Scots, 
Piets, and other tribes, entered London in triumph, 
to the great joy of the unprotected inhabitants. 
The ancient Roman wall is considered to have 
encompassed the city on all sides, and to have had 
four principal entrances, or gates; namely, Aldgate, 
Cripplegate, Newgate, and Dowgate; which per¬ 
mitted the communication of the inhabitants with 
the surrounding country, and, at the same time, 
could be closed against the entrance of any hostile 
force. According to the description of Dr. Wood- 
























THE HISTORY' OF LONDON. 


13 


ward and others, the wall was built in the most 
substantial manner, and was about twenty-two feet 
in height, surmounted with towers about forty feet 
high. This wall constituted an effectual defence 
against the further invasion of the hostile nations, 
until the Roman generals, alarmed at the danger 
impending over their own remote empire, broke up 
their establishment in Britain, which then ceased 
to be a Roman colony. The various names which 
were successively applied to it by its Roman and 
Saxon conquerors, were those of Londinium, Lun- 
donia, Londine, Londres, Augusta, London, Lunden, 
Ceaster, Lunden, Wye, Lundenne, Lunden Bergh, 
and Lunden Burg. The Saxons, on their arrival in 
England, found its name Caer Llundain. Hengist, 
the Saxon chief, having eight years after his arrival 
defeated the Britons at Creceanford (the modern 
Crayford), the latter fled in great confusion to 
the city, followed by the victorious Saxons, whose 
dynasty was soon firmly established throughout the 
entire kingdom. About the year 597, the cele¬ 
brated Augustine, * who introduced Christianity 
among the Anglo-Saxons, and who became arch¬ 
bishop of the English nation, ordained Mellitus 

* It should always be borne in mind that Augustine preached 
to the Pagan Saxons, and not to the early British Christians, as 
recorded by some historians, and who drove the ancient British 
Christians into Wales, where 2000 of them, who refused to bow 
to the assumed supremacy of the bishop of Rome, were slaugh¬ 
tered, in the year 603, at his (Augustine’s) instigation. 




14 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


bishop of the East Saxons; and a church having 
been erected for the bishop, by Ethelbert, king of 
Kent, the city became, for the first time, the see of 
a bishop. The death of Sebert, the first Christian 
king of Essex, however, threw the nation into con¬ 
fusion ; for his sons who, during the lifetime of their 
father, had professed their adherence to Christ¬ 
ianity, at his death publicly renounced that faith, 
and, amongst other acts, expelled Mellitus from his 
diocese. The conversion of Eadbald, king of Kent, 
caused the recal of the good bishop; but the inhabi¬ 
tants of London, who preferred to continue Pagans, 
refused to receive him. In 764, and again in 801, 
the city suffered fearfully from the ravages of fire, 
which caused a dreadful sacrifice of both life and 
property. In the year 833, London first had the 
honour, which, in modern ages, it has exclusively 
enjoyed, of being the spot chosen for the meeting 
of Parliament. Egbert, king of the West Saxons, his 
son Ethelwolf, and Withlaf, king of Mercia, with 
the bishops and great men of the land, assembled 
to consider on the best means of meeting the Danes, 
whose piracies had been characterized by a boldness 
and cruelty hitherto unprecedented. Their delibe¬ 
rations and consequent efforts appear to have been 
of little avail; for in the year 839, scarcely six years 
afterwards, these warlike marauders landed in Kent, 
and after destroying both Canterbury and Rochester, 
proceeded to London, and having conquered the city, 
mercilessly slaughtered its inhabitants. 























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


15 


Their success in these buccaneering exploits em¬ 
boldened them to essay the conquest of the whole 
island, an event which they attempted in the year 
851, when, mustering a fleet of three hundred and 
fifty ships, they sailed up the Thames, reduced 
London, and established a body of troops there, to 
the great annoyance of the surrounding country. 
The Danes, however, enjoyed their newly-acquired 
power but a short time; for that man who, above 
all other men, must be considered the wisest and 
best king that England ever possessed, was even 
then devising his plans for the deliverance of his 
country. Having defeated the Danes in several 
encounters, Alfred hastened to lay siege to London, 
and carried on the assault with such vigour, that- 
the Danes were compelled to capitulate. Alfred 
restored the city, which had been partially destroyed 
by the Danes, repaired the wall, and, having thus 
newly-created it, as a powerful city, entrusted its 
government to the hands of his son-in-law, Ethelred, 
whom he created Earl of Mercia. At his death, 
his widow, Ethelfleda, delivered up formally the 
government of the city to her brother Edward. 
This Ethelred distinguished himself in 894, in an 
attack upon the Danes, who had landed on the 
Essex coast, near Canvey Island, and erected a 
very strong castle there. Accompanied by a select 
body of the citizens, Ethelred marched into Essex, 
defeated the Danes, destroyed their castle, and 
brought the wife and sons of Hasten, the Danish 





























16 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


chief, in triumph to London. In the following year, 
895, another detachment of the Danish forces, which 
had established themselves on Mersey Island, at 
the mouth of the river Colne, there to await the 
success of their comrades, sailed up the Thames, 
and afterwards up the river Lea (the ancient Ligan), 
and established themselves in a strong camp near 
Hertford. The citizens, alarmed at the danger 
which threatened London, accompanied Alfred in 
his attempt to dislodge the marauders. Their first 
attack, however, was unsuccessful, and they were 
repulsed with considerable loss. The wisdom of 
Alfred, however, saved them. Finding it would be 
dangerous to renew the attack, he disposed of his 
army, so as to cut off all communication of the 
Danes with the surrounding country, and then pro¬ 
ceeded to divert the water of the Ligan, leaving 
the Danish ships “high and dry.” Cut off from 
all means of escape, in the event of a defeat, the 
Danes prudently gave up the contest, and retreat¬ 
ed without their vessels. The citizens restored the 
navigation of the river, and brought the most use¬ 
ful ships to London. Under the auspicious influence 
of a prolonged peace, London appears, in this and 
the succeeding reign, to have increased in com¬ 
mercial greatness ; and by a law passed in the reign 
of Atlielstan, for regulating the currency of the 
kingdom, eight coiners were allowed to London; 
Canterbury being the only city that was privileged 
with a similar number. In the year 945, a Par- 






THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


17 


liament (or Wittenagemote) was held in London, 
and, in 961, a fever broke out in the city, which 
destroyed a large portion of its inhabitants. The city 
was surrounded by marshes, and the miasma, gene¬ 
rated in these spots, caused diseases which raged 
with fear fill effect in a city, the buildings of which 
were arranged in the very worst possible manner, 
with reference to ventilation and cleanliness. In 
the same year, St. Paul’s Cathedral was destroyed 
by fire; a few years afterwards a similar calamity 
destroyed nearly the whole of the houses in the 
city. By the returns in Doom’s-day Book, London 
appears now to have attained the position of the 
largest city in the kingdom. In the year 992, the 
predatory visits of the Danes again commenced, 
and were defeated in that and following years 
by the bravery of the citizens. The other towns 
and cities were, however, unable to cope with the 
fiery foe, and the Danes were thus in possession 
of all the strong-holds of the kingdom, except Can¬ 
terbury and London. Pent up in this latter city, 
Ethelred, in his emergency, called a national 
council, which met in London; at which, it was 
resolved to purchase the departure of the Danish 
forces, at a sum, stated by historians, of <£8,000 
or £48,000 (most probably the latter amount). 
The peace, thus dearly purchased, was of short 
duration; for Ethelred, by an act of barbarous 
cruelty, drew down upon himself the wrath of the 
Danish king, Swegen. A number of Danes being 


c 









18 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


settled in the country, a general massacre of them 
was ordered, without distinction of age and sex; 
and amongst those who perished, was Gunhild, the 
sister of Swegen, or Sweyne, with her husband 
Palingus, who had become hostages for the obser¬ 
vance of the treaty. This act incensed the Danish 
monarch, who, the next year, 1013, entered the 
Humber with a powerful fleet; and after subduing 
the Saxons, who made but a feeble resistance, con¬ 
quered the whole country, with the exception of 
the city of London. Ethelred fled to Normandy; 
the citizens, deserted by the king, submitted quietly 
to Sweyne, who was proclaimed King of England 
in the city. Sweyne lived but a few months in 
his new authority; he died in the spring of 1014, 
and Ethelred was immediately recalled to enjoy 
the sovereignty, which, however, he only possessed 
for a short time. The citizens, on hearing of his 
death, immediately proclaimed Edmund Ironside, 
his son, as his successor ; and, by the consent of the 
nobility, he was crowned in the city of London. 
The clergy, however, were in favour of Canute, 
the son of the late Danish king, whom they pro¬ 
claimed as king at Southampton. Canute, apprized 
of the feeling of the clergy, fitted out a powerful 
fleet, and entered the Thames, with the intention 
of capturing London, the strong-hold of the Saxon 
monarch. When he arrived off the city, he found 
his further progress arrested by the bridge, which 
had been previously erected across the Thames, and 



























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


19 


which now bristled with the spears of an armed 
force, sufficiently powerful to resist the further 
progress of his fleet. In this emergency he had 
recourse to an enterprize, which, considering the 
age in which it was attempted, is certainly one 
of the most remarkable instances of perseverance 
and military skill on record; namely, that of 
cutting a canal through the land on the northern 
side of the river, from Rotherhithe to Chelsea, and 
thus to bring round his fleet so as to invest the 
city. The nature of the country, which consisted, in 
that direction, of a low marsh, favoured the work, 
which still required the application of immense 
labour, and no trifling exercise of skill. The 
canal commenced below Rotherhithe, and crossed 
the marshes to Lambeth, thence through Vauxhall, 
and finally entered the Thames at the lower end of 
Chelsea Reach. This great work being completed, 
Canute brought his fleet round to the west side of 
London Bridge, and then commenced an attack on 
the city. The valour of the citizens, however, kept 
him at bay, till a peace was concluded between 
Canute and Edmund Ironside, which resulted in a 
division of the kingdom ; Mercia, including London, 
falling to Canute’s share. Canute shortly afterwards, 
on the death of Ironside, succeeded to the whole 
kingdom ; and we have a striking proof at this time 
of the wealth and power of London, that of a tax 
of <£83,000, exacted by Canute in one year, for the 
support of his Danish fleet and mercenaries: £11,000 






20 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


was raised in London alone. The city had, in fact, 
become the great golden reservoir, which has ever 
since been resorted to by kings, either for their 
crimes and follies, or their virtues. On the death 
of Canute, the city sent members to the Wittenage- 
mote, or Parliament, assembled at Oxford, where 
Harold was chosen to the regal power; and, in all 
these great matters of state, the nobility appear to 
have consulted the representatives of the city. In 
1052, the fleet of Earl Godwin, who had taken up 
arms against Edward the Confessor, passed up to 
London (where it met with no opposition), and 
through the arches of the bridge, with the intention 
of destroying the royal fleet. The differences of the 
earl and his sovereign were, however, accommodated 
by the interposition of some of the principal nobles. 

The battle of Hastings having resulted in the de¬ 
feat and death of Harold, the earls of Northumber¬ 
land and Mercia arrived in London from the fatal 
battle plain, and proposed, to the leading citizens, 
the proclamation of Edgar Atheling as king of Eng¬ 
land. There was some opposition to this proposal; 
many of the citizens deeming - discretion to be the 
better part of valour, and wishing at once to deliver 
up the city to the Norman despot. The spirit of 
patriotism, however, held way, and the city declared 
in favour of Edgar. William the Conqueror hearing 
of the state of indecision that prevailed in the city, 
arrived in London, by forced marches, to prevent the 
declaration of the patriots. The citizen army met 





THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


21 


him at Southwark; and though repulsed by the 
Norman cavalry with some loss, yet were they so well 
prepared for a struggle, that the Conqueror declined 
laying siege to the city in the winter; and, having 
burnt the suburb of Southwark, marched to reduce 
the towrns in the west of England. How far the re¬ 
sistance might have been successful, and the country 
have been spared the brutalizing yoke of the Nor¬ 
mans, from whose feudal institutions we have not 
even yet freed ourselves, had the city stood firm 
to its first purpose, it is idle to conjecture. The 
clergy, w r hose avarice led them to hope for more 
power under the Norman dynasty than the popular 
institutions of the Saxons allowed them to assume, 
laboured hard to sow divisions in the cause of the 
patriots, a work in which they succeeded but too 
well; for, shortly afterwards, the city declared in 
favour of the Conqueror, and the patriotic brothers, 
the earls of Northumberland and Mercia, retired 
to the north of England for safety. The bishops 
immediately repaired to Berkhampstead, and swore 
allegiance to William, prevailing upon the nobility, 
and even upon Edgar Atheling, to submit to the 
usurper. On the receipt of this intelligence, William 
hastened to London, and was received by the magis¬ 
trates and the principal citizens, who delivered up 
to him the keys, and, in common with the nobility 
and clergy, desired him to accept the crown. The 
first step taken by the Conqueror was the erection 
of a strong fortress, which he garrisoned with the 





22 THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 

flower of his troops, with the view of overawing 
the citizens. On his return from visiting his Nor¬ 
man dominions, he was received with great state 
by the citizens; in return for which, he granted 
them a charter, written in Saxon characters, which 
was (and we believe still is) preserved in the archives 
of the city. The charter consists of four lines and 
a half, written on a slip of parchment, six inches by 
one, and runs as follows: 

“William the king, friendly salutes William the 
bishop, and Godfrey the portreve, and all the bur¬ 
gesses within London, both French and English. 
And I declare that I grant you to be all laworthy, 
as you were in the days of King Edw r ard; and I 
grant that every child shall be his father’s heir, 
after his father’s days ; and I will not suffer any, 
person to do you wrong. God keep you.” 

By a subsequent charter, the king granted a 
hide of land at Gadsden, in Hertfordshire, to the 
city. From this period, to the year 1132, a series 
of events happened to the city which it will be 
better to arrange chronologically. 

In 1077, an accidental fire destroyed the greater 
part of the city; the White Towner of London was 
also built. 

In 1091, a dreadful hurricane, in the month of 
November, blew down many churches, and upwards 
of 600 houses. 

In 1093 and 1132,- the city was again almost 
wholly destroyed by fires. 






THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


23 


111,1097, William Rufus exacted large sums of 
money from the people, for carrying on his works 
at the Tower and Westminster, and for rebuilding 
London Bridge “ anew with wood,” the old bridge 
having been destroyed by a great land-flood in 1091. 

In 1091, the effect of the tidal currents of the 
ocean was exhibited in an extraordinary manner, 
both in this year, and the year 1114. In the former 
year, a high spring tide overflowed the banks of 
the Thames, destroying an immense number of in¬ 
habitants, with their villages and cattle, and causing 
those extensive shoals known as the Goodwin sands. 
The latter vear was as remarkable for the reces- 
sion of the waters, which allowed persons to walk 
over the Thames dryshod, both above and below 
London Bridge. 

& 

King Henry I. granted a charter to the city of 
London of a very comprehensive character. By this 
charter the ancient immunities and privileges of 
the city were continued, and the following special 
privileges granted: 1. The jurisdiction in civil 
matters over the county of Middlesex, and the ap¬ 
pointment of sheriff on the payment of a quit-rent 
of c£300 per ann. 2..No citizen could be compelled 
to plead to any cause without the walls of the city. 

3. Release from various dues payable to the crown. 

4. An exemption from the ordeal of trial by battle. 

5. Royal domestics and attaches not to be quartered 
in the city. 6. The citizens to enjoy free trade, or 
a release from all tolls, customs, &c., on goods, mer- 










24 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


chandize, &c. 7. No citizen to be amerced, or fined 

beyond his ware, that is, the price of his head or 
life ; in those ages, generously valued at the sum 
of 100s. 8. The power of reprisal on all towns 

that extorted tolls from the citizens, and of attach¬ 
ing the effects, in London, of all county debtors; 
and finally, the confirmation of all the privileges 
of hunting enjoyed by the citizens in Middlesex, 
Surrey, and the Chiltern Hundreds. 

The spirit of this charter has been given to afford 
the reader some idea of the power enjoyed by the 
city of London, when a monarch found it necessary 
to grant such extensive and unreasonable privi¬ 
leges, in order to insure its support. The different 
fraternities or guilds of the city appear to have been 
established about this time. 

In the struggle between Maud and Stephen for 
the crown of England, the city of London, influenced 
by the archbishops and bishops, who had violated 
their oaths by having previously sworn allegiance 
to Maud, declared in favour of Stephen; a decision 
of which they had great reason to repent, for that 
despotic monarch, shortly afterwards (1139), com¬ 
pelled them, in despite of the-charter of Henry I., 
to pay one hundred marks, in silver, for the right 
to choose their own sheriffs. The success which 
attended the armies of Queen Maud, gave her an 
ample opportunity of punishing the folly and perfidy 
of the citizens, of which she was not slow to avail 
herself. They were, in 1141, divested of many of 





















THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


25 


their most valuable privileges, and Geoffrey Earl of 
Essex, was appointed justiciary of their city, and of 
the county of Middlesex. As a proof of the villany 
of the leading clergy in this age, it may he men¬ 
tioned, that after the defeat of Stephen, they all de¬ 
serted his cause, and flocked over to that of Maud ; 
and even Stephen’s own brother, Henry bishop of 

Winchester, upon promise of exclusive patronage in 

m , * 

the church, received Maud with open arms, excom¬ 
municated all his brother’s partizans, and absolved 
those who deserted his standard to join that of 

his successful rival. The citizens, after an ineffec- 

' » 

tual attempt to form a party in favour of Stephen, 
gave in their allegiance to the Queen, and attended 
by her uncle and the Queen of Scotland, she was re¬ 
ceived at London by the citizens with a state befitting 
the occasion. The high hand, however, with which 
Queen Maud ruled her subjects, resulted in her 
own downfall; she refused to permit the release of 
Stephen, or to accept his submission to her autho¬ 
rity. She treated the prayer of the citizens, for a 
restoration of their privileges, with the scorn which, 
perhaps, it merited; and, more dangerous than all, 
she refused to comply with the avaricious demands 
of the bishop of Winchester. These malecontents 
having combined their forces, succeeded ultimately 
in driving Maud from the kingdom, and re-estab¬ 
lishing Stephen on the throne. The weakness and 
imbecility of the government at this period proved ‘ 
a very inefficient barrier against the progress of 

D 









26 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


crime. Nightly outrages, in the form of robberies, 
burglaries, and even murders, were perpetrated in 
the city, and the disclosures consequent upon an 
accidental discovery of one of these parties, proved 
that the sons of rich citizens, and even citizens 
themselves, were concerned in them. 

In 1176, the foundations of old London Bridge 
were laid, the previous bridge having been des¬ 
troyed by a terrific fire which, in 1136, swept away 
a considerable portion of the city, extending from 
Aldgate on the one side, to St. Clements’Dane, in the 
Strand on the other. The earliest modern bridge 
over the Thames was erected between the years 993 
and 1016. The structure referred to was of stone. 
The architect, as mentioned in king John’s recom¬ 
mendatory letter, was Isenbert, master of the schools 
of Xaintes, and architect of the bridges of that 
place, and at Rochelle. About four years after its 
completion, a fire broke out in Southwark, and ex¬ 
tended towards the bridge; a strong south wind 
wafted the fiery embers over to the Middlesex side 
of the bridge, and caused one of the buildings to 
ignite. The crowds of people who had thronged on 
the bridge to render assistance, were thus cut off on 
either side from escape, and it is calculated, that 
more than 3000 perished in the flames, or were 
drowned in iheir attempt to escape. 

Charters were issued by kings Henry II. and 
Richard I. confirming the privileges granted to the 
city by Henry I. The antipathies of the age against 




THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


27 


the unfortunate Jews were strongly marked; many 
of them had settled in London, and having, by their 
superior business habits, acquired immense wealth, 
were looked upon by their less successful competi¬ 
tors with envy, and by the rabble as fit subjects for 
plunder and violence. The religious (?) prejudices 
of the age were also, as religious prejudices always 
are, bitterly sanguinary. On the day preceding the 
coronation of Richard I. (Sept. 2, 1189), some in¬ 
timation had been given to the Jews that it would 
be dangerous to attend that ceremony. Prompted, 
however, by an excusable curiosity, many of them 
attended at Westminster Abbey, and attempted to 
obtain admission, by bringing presents to the king. 
They were driven back by the officials of the Abbey, 
and a rumour instantly got abroad, that the king 
had given orders for their complete destruction. So 
strong was the prejudice, that this alone was suffi¬ 
cient for the angry populace. They fell upon every 
poor fellow whom they could identify as a son of 
Israel, and their sanguinary fury rested not till they 
had destroyed their victims. Not satisfied with this, 
they repaired to the city, plundered the houses of 
the unfortunate Jews, and burnt them, after mur¬ 
dering their inmates. The arm of the law, though 
powerless to prevent these atrocities, was sufficiently 
strong to punish them. The king caused the ring¬ 
leaders to be apprehended the day afterwards, and 
hanged immediately. That the act of phrensy was, 
inagreat measure, a religious one, is evident from 



















28 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the fact, that the monks countenanced the deed of 
blood, deeming the slaughter of heretics a meri¬ 
torious action. King Richard, anxious to perform 
the conditions of the treaty entered into between 
his father and the king of France, jointly to under¬ 
take an expedition to Palestine, to redeem Jeru¬ 
salem from the hands of the Saracens, directed a 
precept to the sheriff of London, Henry de Cornhill, 
to provide the arms and accoutrements necessary 
for this purpose; and when remonstrated with by 
the nobles, on the steps he took to raise money, by 
alienating the crown lands and selling privileges to 
various cities, replied, “ That in a time of necessity 
it was no bad policy for a man to make use of his 
own,” adding, “ that if he could light on a proper 
purchaser, he would even sell the city of London.” 
The king having, during his proposed sojourn in 
Palestine, appointed a regency, and the conduct of 
one of the regents, the bishop of Ely, having given 
offence, he was publicly deposed by the nobility, 
bishops and citizens, assembled in St. Paul’s church¬ 
yard. Upon Richard’s return to England, after the 
disastrous crusade, and consequent imprisonment 
in Germany, he was welcomed by the citizens in the 
most enthusiastic manner, and with the greatest 
display of splendour; a circumstance that gave rise 
to the well-known saying of a German nobleman. 
That if the emperor had known the immense 
wealth of England, he would have demanded a far 
higher ransom.” The citizens, at this time, paid 
































THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 29 

towards the king’s ransom the sum of 1500 marks. 
In the year 1196, a dangerous insurrection broke 
out in the city, consequent on the proceedings of one 
Fitz Osbert, nicknamed Longbeard, between whose 
chin and the razor there existed a mortal enmity. 
Like a far higher character, his bodily presence 
was weak, for he was deformed ; but his speech 
was weighty and eloquent. Espousing the popular 
cause, he soon found occasion to excite the people 
against a certain tax; and having raised a disturb¬ 
ance, -he was cited before Hubert archbishop of 
Canterbury, the king’s justiciary. Fie attended 
with such a numerous retinue of followers, that the 
archbishop was alarmed, and dismissed him with a 
polite reproof. An order was, however, issued to 
seize him; but when this was attempted, his small 
company defended themselves, and having come to 
the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, in Cheapside, they 
shut themselves in, and fortified the steeple. The 
mob, on the intelligence reaching them of the con¬ 
dition of their favourite, assembled in crowds, but 
were persuaded by the magistrates to return home. 
The recusants were then smoked out by means of a 
fire, and Longbeard being taken, was, with eight of 
his followers, executed in Smithfield. A relation of 
his, a priest, pretended that miracles were wrought 
at his place of execution, and the people crowded 
thither in such great numbers, preserving the earth 
on which even a particle of his blood had fallen, 
that the authorities found it necessary to employ 










30 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


a body of soldiers to drive the deluded fanatics 
away. In the year 1197, Richard II., in considera¬ 
tion of the sum of 1500 marks, granted to the city 
the first charter for the conservation of the river 
Thames. The charter, however, only went to the 
extent of commanding all weirs (for the capture of 
fish) to be removed anywhere within the Thames, and 
forbade the keeper of the Tower to receive any dues 
arising from them. In the last year of this king’s 
reign, the sheriffs of London and Middlesex were 
commanded to provide standard weights and mea¬ 
sures to be sent to all the counties in the kingdom. 

King John, on his accession to the crown in 1199, 
by three separate charters, confirmed to the city 
the privileges granted by his predecessors; and, in 
addition, granted them exemption from all tolls in 
his foreign dominions, and the power of removing 
all weirs in the rivers Thames and Medway. By 
a similar ordinance, passed two years afterwards, 
the guild of weavers were expelled the city for some 
offence that is not specified. In 1205, the emperor 
Otho arrived in London, and was received by 
the citizens with great pomp and splendour. Two 
years afterwards, Henry Fitz Alwyn, who had 
for twenty years enjoyed the title of bailiff of the 
city, was permitted to assume the title of mayor. 
Four years afterwards, the sheriffs of London were 
imprisoned by order of the king, in consequence of 
their refusal to allow the royal purveyor to take 
back, out of the city, a quantity of corn that he had 











THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 31 

brought in to be disposed of in a period of scarcity. 
Upon proper representation, however, being made 
to the king, he immediately ordered their liberation. 
In 1210, king John summoned a Parliament to 
meet him at his palace at St. Bride’s, London, when 
he exacted of the clergy the sum of <£100,000, and 
<£40,000 from the white monks. An interdiction 
of divine worship by the pope followed, and the 
public ordinances of religion were not performed 
for some time. One of the first acts of resistance 
to the insolent power of the monarch, a resistance 
which, it must be borne in mind, ended in Magna 
Charta being signed, was on the part of an officer 
of the city, Robert Fitz Walter, castellain and 
standard-bearer, one of the barons, who refused to 
give security for his allegiance to the monarch, and 
fled into France. His splendid palace at Baynard’s 
Castle was immediately destroyed, by order of the 
king. At the same period, the pope’s legate re¬ 
ceived the submission of the low-minded monarch 
in St. Paul’s Cathedral. By the fifth and last 
charter of John, a.d. 1215, the privilege of elect¬ 
ing their chief magistrate from amongst themselves, 
was conferred on the citizens, an office which had 
hitherto been filled up by the monarch himself. 

And now the barons of England having gathered 
strength and unity of purpose, prepared for that 
struggle, which resulted in the great charter of a 
nation’s rights. Having arrived in London, they 
repaired to the New Temple, where the king was 







*» I 


32 THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 

then staying, and demanded of him the re-establish¬ 
ment of king Edward’s laws. The king rejected 
their demands; and the barons soon found the 
citizens ready to join them in their resistance to 
the sovereign. The barons, who were encamped at 
Bedford, instantly repaired to London, and entered 
the city on the 24th of May, having marched from 
Ware the previous night. The gates were thrown 
open to them, and the weak but vain monarch, bereft 
of his strong-hold, was but too glad to surrender. 
Magna Charta was signed, the 13th article of wdiich 
confirms the privileges anciently enjoyed by the 
city of London. 

The barons, mistrustful of the honesty of John, 
retained possession of the city and Tower of London 
till the great Charta was signed; but they found 
that no tie, however solemn, could bind so faithless 
a monarch. John applied to the pope to absolve 
him from his oath, and by treacherous negotiations 
with continental powers, procured large armies from 
France and the Netherlands. The barons retired 
to London, and in their emergency, sent an invita¬ 
tion to Louis, eldest son of king Philip of France, 
offering him the crown of the realm. In the mean¬ 
time, the foreign mercenaries of John having ravaged 
the country, approached the city of London; but 
the citizens, nothing daunted, threw open their gates, 
and mustered their forces to receive him. John, 
dispirited by this step, withdrew his troops, but one 
of his generals, advancing too near the city, was 



















I 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 33 

wounded, and his detachment routed by the civic 
forces. The city, at the same time, fitted out a 
powerful fleet to clear the coast of pirates that in¬ 
fested the river and the adjacent coasts. It was suc¬ 
cessful—sixty-five ships being taken and destroyed. 
Louis shortly arrived with a powerful army, and was 
received in great state by the citizens of London. 
On the death of John, Henry III. became king, 
and Louis concluded a treaty of peace, and retired 
to his own country. Having expressly stipulated 
in this treaty for the ancient privileges of London, 
the citizens, in acknowledgment, lent him the sum 
of 5000 marks, to pay his debts before he embarked 
for France. In the year 1218, the forest of Mid¬ 
dlesex, which would appear to have extended almost 
to the city walls, was disforested, and the citizens 
purchased a great portion of the lands, and enlarged 
the suburbs. At the same time, the prison of 
Newgate was repaired by order of the king. The 
citizens, in the same year, gave the monarch a fif¬ 
teenth of their personal estates for the confirmation 
of their ancient privileges. In 1220, an edict was 
issued commanding all foreigners, with the exception 
of those engaged as merchants, to quit the town by 
the Michaelmas following. It may be readily 
surmised that Henry, irritated at the conduct of 
the city, in sending for Louis to assume the crown 
during his predecessor’s life, would soon find some 
opportunity of punishing his former opponents. 
In consequence of their success at a wrestling 

E 









34 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


match with the men of Westminster, many of the 
citizens were beaten and wounded by the retainers 
of the abbot of that place. An eminent citizen, 
named Constantine Fitz Arnulph, espoused the 
cause of the injured men in a somewhat intemperate 
manner; and, having had the boldness to avow his 
offence before the chief justiciary, was, with two 
others, executed the next morning, notwithstanding 
that he offered 15,000 marks for his own pardon. 
Many of the citizens were also brutally maimed ; the 
mayor and magistrates were degraded from their 
office, and a custos set over the city by the crown. 
The citizens were also compelled to find thirty sure¬ 
ties for their good behaviour, and to pay many thou¬ 
sand marks to the king. The conduct of the king, 
however, led the Parliament to demand and obtain 
from him a confirmation of Magna Charta. The 
avarice of the monarch knew no bounds ; he exacted 
5000 marks on the ground that they had given a 
similar sum to his enemy, Louis, and also made 
them pay, for their charters, a second fifteenth part 
of their personal estates; he assessed a poll tax 
upon them of a very oppressive character, and 
again exacted a further sum of <£20,000. On the 
marriage of Henry with Eleanor of Provence, they 
were escorted into London by a calvalcade of citizens 
in a scene of the most imposing splendour. The 
merchants of Amiens and other places, about this 
time, paid a tax to the city for permission to land 
and house wood therein. About this time, also, pipes 



























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


35 


were first laid down for the supply of water from 
Tyburn to London. The water was conveyed from 
six wells, at the latter place, through a six-inch 
leaden pipe. The city had been previously sup¬ 
plied from several small streams and canals, in and 
near the city, the principal of which were the river 
wells, which took their rise at the west of London, 
Holborn-brook, Wall-brook, Langliorne-hrook, &c. 
These rills, the produce of springs, were lost by the 
number of buildings erected along their course. 
In the year 1238, Baldwin, the Greek Emperor, 
having arrived in England, was received in great 
state by the citizens. The enmity of Henry against 
the city still continued, and various acts of perse¬ 
cution were carried on against the citizens. Some 
of these acts, however, were called for by the ve¬ 
nality of the official functionaries. Gerard Batt, 
who was re-chosen mayor in 1241, was rejected by 
the king, for extorting money from the victuallers 
during a former mayoralty. In 1244, Griffith, 
eldest son of the Prince of Wales, in attempting to 
escape from the top of the Tower of London, lost 
his life; the rope, made of sheets, table-cloths, &c., 
being too weak to support his corpulent body. 
The rapacity of the king still continued, and his 
exactions from the citizens were renewed day by 
day. An ordinance came out about this time, for 
covering houses with tiles or slates, instead of straw, 
in order to prevent the ravages of fires which were 
of almost daily occurrence. The citizens were also 






36 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


ordered by the king to choose one of their best 
artists, as custos cunii, or keeper of the mint. In 
the same year, 1245, the corporation purchased, for 
the annual fee of £50 per annum, the farm of 
Queenhithe, in Thames-street, from the earl of 
Cornwall. The exactions of the priests having, 
with those of the monarch, almost drained the mer¬ 
cantile community of its money, it was resolved, 
at the Parliament held at Westminster, in 1247, 
to send letters to the popes and cardinals, humbly 
entreating them to consider the miserable state of 
the nation, and not to ruin the people entirely by 
their abominable exactions. The seal of the cor¬ 
poration was, by order of Parliament, affixed to 
these letters. On Valentine’s eve, this year, an 
earthquake was felt in London, which destroyed a 
great many houses. The Parliament, in the follow¬ 
ing year, began to make a stand against the cruel 
exactions of the monarch. They refused to grant 
him any for his pecuniary aid. The king incensed, 
dissolved the Parliament, but his poverty was such, 
that he was obliged to sell his plate and jewels. 
On being told that he could find purchasers in the 
city of London, he replied, “ That if the treasure 
of Augustus were to be sold, the city of London 
could purchase it; ” adding, “ that those clownish 
Londoners, who call themselves barons, and abound 
in all things, are an immense treasure of themselves,” 
a fact he had fully realized, by the extent to which 
he had drained their coffers. Every scheme he could 

































THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 37 

adopt to obtain money, whether of an insinuating 
character, or tout au contraire , he appears to have 
resorted to; at one time, trying to work upon their 
religious enthusiasm, by proposing a crusade; at 
another, fermenting disturbances amongst them by 
his own domestics, that he might have the opportu¬ 
nity of mulcting them in fines, for their unruly con¬ 
duct. Remonstrances and prayers were vain. The 
sovereign was the greedy horse-leech, everlastingly 
crying, “ Give, give.” By a subsequent charter, 
given in consideration of receiving five hundred 
marks, he again confirmed their ancient privileges, 
and granted them the power of presenting their 
newly-elected mayor to the barons of the exche¬ 
quer, in the absence of the king. As a proof of his 
insatiable rapacity, we find the following instances 
recorded, between the years 1254-6. In 1254, there 
was the tax for aurum regince , or queen’s gold. In 
1255, he accepted a gift of c£100; and afterwards, 
(because his majesty was not satisfied), a valuable 
piece of plate was presented to him. In the same 
year the city was fined three thousand marks, for 
the escape of a prisoner. In 1256, a demand for 
a similar sum, and a further sum of four hundred 
marks, for the restitution of the liberties which had 
been suspended for non-payment of the former sum ; 
also, a further sum of one hundred marks in the 
same year. In the following year, William de 
Valence, half-brother to the king, having, without 
provocation, wounded several citizens, was stoned to 








38 THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 

death by the populace. The exactions of the king 
and the pope, with the sum of money taken over 
to Germany by Richard, king of the Romans 
(amounting, it is said, to <£700,000), caused a 
general stagnation of trade, to which two deficient 
harvests’, owing to profuse rains, followed; and a 
famine ensued, carrying off, in London alone, no 
less than twenty thousand persons. The first gold 
coinage in England, in the form of a penny, 
took place in this year. Fortified by the assist¬ 
ance of the city, the barons, under the earl of 
Leicester, after several vain attempts to moderate 
the tyrannical rapacity of the monarch, declared 
war against him. Their forces were swelled by 
volunteers from the ranks of the citizens, who, 
however, lacked sadly the discipline necessary to 
encounter a well-organized soldiery. Leicester, at 
first, was successful; and the king, prince Edward, 
and the king of the Romans, were taken prisoners 
by the barons; but Edward having contrived to 
escape, and mustering a powerful army, revenged 
his former ill success by the defeat of Leicester’s 
army, and the death of the earl and his son. The 
king, again in possession of power, continued his 
oppressive and cruel extortions upon the citizens, 
demanding from them 60,000 marks, but ultimately 
accepting 20,000. Another powerful insurrection, 
raised by the earl of Gloucester, in 1267, put the 
city again in the power of the barons; but the 
citizens either lacked the courage or the will this 






THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


39 


time to support them, and, on the approach of 
Henry, a peace was concluded between the rival 
powers. All this time the city was a prey to the 
fury of contending factions; and what with the 
rapacity of the mob, on the one hand, and the king 
on the other, was well nigh ruined. The unfortunate 
Jews also, who, notwithstanding their persecutions, 
still lingered about the city with as much attach¬ 
ment as if it were their Israel of by-gone days, 
were, at every whim of the mob, dragged from 
their habitations and murdered, and their property 
plundered; while they were able to purchase ex¬ 
emption, from kingly and priestly violence, only by 
the payment of large sums of money. So completely 
was the social state of London disorganized, that 
brute violence alone prevailed; and, in the scramble 
for power, that party wdiich was defeated to-day was 
successful to-morrow. In the meantime came one 
who alone could stop the progress of royal cupidity. 
Death threw its mantle over the aged king, and 
prince Edward succeeded to the throne of his father. 

Edward I., at the death of his father, was in the 
Holy Land; and his first act was, to banish his 
old enemies, the Flemings, from London. On his 
arrival in London, in 1274, he was received with 
great splendour by the authorities, the chief citizens 
profusely scattering silver and gold amongst the 
mob. A squabble about the election of mayor, 
which seemed to threaten a riot, caused the king 
to appoint a custos, till Sir Walter Harvey was 

























40 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


chosen mayor. The rapacity of tradesmen, at that 
time, caused Edward to issue an ordinance, regu¬ 
lating the prices of provisions. By this law, the 
best capon was sold for 2d., the best goose at 5d., 
the best swan or crane 3s., the best peacock at Is., 
and the best lamb at 4d. per lb., (from Christmas 
to Lent, 6d.) The prevalence of usury caused a 
law to be passed, that all usurers were to wear a 
badge in public, or else to quit the kingdom. Jews 
were altogether forbidden to lend money on usury. 
In 1275, Edward employed the Lord Mayor, Gre¬ 
gory Rokeslie, on a foreign embassy, and by the 
king’s orders the office of mayor was vested in four 
officers, chosen by the citizens. A dreadful earth¬ 
quake happened in this year, which appears to 
have been attended with very disastrous effects, both 
in London and in the country. In 1281, London 
Bridge being in a ruinous and dangerous condition, 
the king issued letters patent for a general collec¬ 
tion throughout the kingdom, and also empow¬ 
ering the mayor to take a certain toll, to enable 
the city to complete the repairs. Two years after, 
five arches of the bridge were carried away by the 
ice, on the breaking up of the frost. In the year 
1282, fell Llewellyn, the last British king of Wales, 
who was treacherously betrayed into the hands of 
the English. His head was cut off and sent to 
Edward, who ordered it to be carried into London, 
where a cavalcade of citizens met the messenger 
who conveyed it, and conducted him into the city 







I 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 41 

/ 

with trumpets and horns. The head was then 
carried through Cheapside, on a lance, crowned 
with a silver chaplet, and set on the pillory on 
that spot till night, when it was removed to the 
Tower, where it was fixed, with a wreath of ivy 
surrounding it. Laurence Ducket, a goldsmith, 
having, in 1284, wounded one Ralph Crepin, took 
refuge in Bow Church. In the night, Crepin’s 
friends stole into the church, and having killed 
Ducket, hung him in one of the windows, so as to 
induce a belief that he had committed suicide. 
The coroner’s jury returned a verdict of felo de se ; 
but a boy, who had witnessed the murder, gave 
information to the city authorities, and the ring¬ 
leaders were hanged. One woman, who contrived 
the murder, was burnt alive. A short time previous 
to this, the city was divided into twenty-four wards, 
each of which chose their own common councilmen 
to represent them. In consequence of some distur¬ 
bances in the city, the Lord Treasurer summoned 
the civic authorities before him to render an account 
of the manner in which the king’s peace was kept. 
The mayor, Gregory Rockeslie, deeming this an in¬ 
vasion of the privileges of the city, refused to attend 
in his official capacity; and the king, in consequence, 
appointed a custos, or governor, for twelve years. 
This revolution in the government, gave rise to some 
disorders, which led to robberies, and even mur¬ 
ders ; the result of which was, that no stranger was 

allowed to carry a weapon, or to be seen in the 

F 






42 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


streets after the ringing of the curfew-bell. Edward, 
on his return from France, in 1290, set to work in 
earnest to redress the grievances under which the 
citizens laboured. The usurious practices of the 
Jews were punished by their banishment, and the 
confiscation of their goods; and the Chief Justice 
and other high legal officers, who had been guilty of 
malpractices, were either banished or fined in heavy 
penalties. Fifteen thousand and sixty Jews were 
thus banished; one fifteenth of whose property and 
estates was granted to the king by the Parliament. 
It having been represented to Edward, that certain 
of the clergy had been confined in the prison of 
Cornhill, called the Tunne, where lewd and dis¬ 
orderly persons were kept, out of mere spite, he 
forbade their confinement in future, under a penalty 
of <£20. This mandate gave offehce to those who, 
doubtless, thought the act made an unjust distinc¬ 
tion between the clergy and the laity; and they 
broke open the Tunne prison, and set its inmates at 
liberty. These parties, however, were punished with 
a lengthened imprisonment; and the city, for not 
suppressing the riot, was fined twenty thousand 
marks. Acts confirmatory of the privileges of the 
city, and regulating the price of provisions, were 
published about this time. In the year 1305, the 
ever-memorable Sir William Wallace,-was brought 
a prisoner to London, and lodged in the house of 
one William Delect, in Fenchurch Street. On the 
23rd August, in the same year, he was conducted 























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


43 


through the city. He was tried at Westminster, 
where he was seated on a bench in a derisive 
manner, with laurels on his head, and accompanied 
by a crowd of persons. He refused to acknowledge 
the power of the court to try him, alleging that he 
was only a prisoner of war, taken while defending 
his country. He was condemned to suffer a dis¬ 
graceful death in Smithfield, where he was hanged, 
drawn, and quartered; his head was fixed on a pole 
on London Bridge, and his four quarters sent to 
Scotland to be placed over the gates of as many 
principal cities. It may seem strange to modern 
ears, but it is, nevertheless, true, that in the fol¬ 
lowing year, when the king conferred the order of 
knighthood on the Prince of Wales, the city con¬ 
tributed, towards the expenses, the sum of <£2000. 
Another fact, equally startling to a manufacturing 
community, is the prohibition of the use of coal, 
by a special edict; this invaluable mineral being 
forbidden on account of the complaints of the 
nobility and gentry, resorting to the city, who 
alleged the same objection that is now urged 
against the insalubrity of manufacturing districts— 
the thick and noisome smoke. The proclamation 
being disregarded, a commission of Oyer and Ter¬ 
miner was issued to punish the contumacious manu- 

* 

facturers, who, wiser than their rulers, had already 
discovered the value of the mineral. 

Edward II. commenced his reign inauspiciously ; 
there being a sum of £83 11 s. unpaid on account 























44 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


of a certain rate, he ordered the issue of a writ to 
distrain the goods of the mayor, aldermen, and 
citizens, for the whole amount. He also attempted 
to levy a poll tax on the city, in common with the 
' other parts of the kingdom; but the citizens resisted 
it on the ground of the exemption afforded them by 
Magna Charta; and the king ultimately ceded this 
right on condition that a loan of <£1000, previously 
granted to him, was converted into a gift. Attempts 
were afterwards made to enforce this tax again ; but 
the citizens were once more enabled to purchase 
exemption by a loan to the government. In 1318, 
the city contributed two hundred men, as its quotum 
of the army sent against the Scots, who, at that 
time, had ravaged England as far as Yorkshire and 
Lancashire. Murders and other outrages were at 
this period very common; and the mayor, John de 
Wangrave, was severely reprimanded by the Lord 
Treasurer for not displaying more vigour in the 
suppression of those tumults. 

The mayor and aldermen appear, also, to have 
acted very tyrannically towards their brother citi¬ 
zens, ejecting from their seats those common coun- 
cilmen who opposed their arbitrary proceedings. 
Complaint was made against them to the Lord 
Treasurer by the jury of Aldermanbury, and the 
mayor. Sir John Gisors, and other principal citizens 
were summoned to appear before him; but they 
absconded, and a parliament subsequently met in 
London, which, being attended with a host of rude 



















THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 45 

soldiers, compelled the citizens to place a strong 
armed guard at the gates. In consequence of the 
insurrection of Lancaster, an army consisting chiefly 
of Londoners, was sent to reduce'the castle of 

• 

Leeds, in Kent, which they accomplished; and the 
king, in acknowledgment, granted them immunity 
from service in any subsequent wars; the city, in 
return, presented his majesty with two thousand 
marks towards the expenses of the war in Scotland. 
The zeal of the citizens unfortunately availed them 
nothing; for the king having defeated Lancaster, 
forced the citizens to pay him a further sum of 
two thousand marks, under pretence of seizing 
their liberties. The queen consort having procured 
the assistance of her brother, the king of France, 
proceeded to wage war against her own husband. 
The Tower of London was fortified, and well stored 
with provisions, the monarch doubting the loyalty 
of the citizens. The queen having, in the mean¬ 
time, sent a letter requesting the aid of the citi¬ 
zens, the latter declared in her favour, beheaded 
Stapleton, bishop of Exeter, the custos of the city, 
forcibly took the keys of the Tower from Sir John 
de Weston, the constable, and discharged all the 
prisoners. The queen’s party was ultimately trium¬ 
phant ; and, Edward II. being taken prisoner, was 
compelled to abdicate the throne in favour of his 
son, Edward III. The new king, in consideration 
of the valuable assistance rendered to him by the 
citizens, commenced his reign by granting them 










46 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


two new charters. The provisions of these charters 
were full, and highly satisfactory; they confirmed 
all the provisions granted by the previous charters; 
and, in addition, many new and valuable privileges. 
At the same time, a charter was granted to one 
Simon, a merchant, exempting him from all taxa¬ 
tion, and from being compelled to serve any of the 

i 

civic offices. 

A dangerous insurrection occurred, in 1328, 
through the conduct of various tradesmen, which 
however, was quelled, though not without the inter¬ 
vention of the crown. In the following year, the 
king entertained the French ambassadors with a 
grand tournament in Cheapside. The adultera¬ 
tion of wines, at this time, called forth a special 
edict from the king against that practice. The 
prevalence of robberies, and murders also, and a 
famine, which greatly enhanced the price of pro¬ 
visions, caused other acts, on the part of the 
monarch, forbidding the practice of wearing arms, 
and of charging an extravagant price for provisions. 
In 1338, Richard de Bettoyne, who was mayor 
of London at the time of the coronation, com¬ 
plained, by petition, that having, by virtue of his 
office as butler, on that occasion, received the 
customary fee of a gold cup, and a gold ewer, the 
sum of £89 12s. 6d. had now been demanded 
of him for the said fee. In the following year, 
the sum of 20,000 marks was raised by assess¬ 
ment in the city, by way of loan to the king, to 








THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


47 


enable him to carry on his wars in Scotland and 
France. About the same time, in consequence of 
a dangerous quarrel between the fishmongers and 
skinners, two citizens were beheaded for assaulting 
the mayor (Andrew Aubey), who had proceeded 
to quell the tumult. The king being again in 
want of money to carry on the war in France, 
ordered that every citizen possessed of more than 
<£40 per annum, should take upon himself the 
order of knighthood. The citizens, however, de¬ 
clined this honour; and, by an evasive answer, 
managed to get rid of the difficulty. 

In 1346, after the battle of Neuilles Cross, near 
Durham, David, king of Scotland, was taken prisoner, 
and brought to London, where he was confined in 
the Tower. Two years afterwards, a terrible plague, 
which first broke out in India, almost decimated 
the population of the city. New burial-grounds were 
opened, and it was computed that at least 100,000 
persons perished in London alone. In 1355, the 
citizens raised, at their own expense, twenty-five men 
at arms, and five-hundred archers, all in one livery, 
to assist the king in his war with France. Two 
years afterwards, the French king, John, being taken 
prisoner after the battle of Poictiers, was brought 
to London; the citizens, more to do honour than to 
disgrace the king, conducted him from Southwark in 
a style of splendour previously unparalleled. From 
the same generous feeling, Edward the Black Prince, 
his conqueror, rode by his side on a small black 

























48 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


galloway, while the French king was mounted on a 
noble white charger. The French having ravaged 
the coasts of Sussex, the city fitted out a powerful 
fleet, which made reprisals on the French coast. 
In 1363, Henry Picard, late mayor of London, 
entertained the king and the prince of Wales with 
their distinguished guests, the kings of Scotland, 
France, and Cyprus. Soon afterwards, Edward III., 
who had fallen into the sear and yellow leaf of life, 
gave a grand tournament in Smithfield, to divert 
his mistress, one Alice Perrers. The tournament 
was a grand one, and was continued for seven days. 
The latter days of this monarch were remarkable 
for a tumult which took place in the city consequent 
upon the citing of the celebrated Wickliffe, the 
reformer, before the bishop of London, by order of 
the pope. The duke of Lancaster, son of the king, 
and Earl Percy, marshal of England, accompanied 
Wickliffe; and having boldly spoken their minds 
to the bishop, the populace, in a fit of fanaticism, 
attacked the palaces of both these noblemen, and 
destroyed them. The king, however, punished the 
city for not suppressing this tumult, by dismissing 
Adam Staple, the mayor, and several of the aider- 
men from their offices. The important events which 
characterized the reign of the succeeding monarch, 
Richard II., would need a distinct notice, were 
it not that these events have been already fully 
detailed in other parts of this work; they were, 
briefly, the memorable rebellion of Wat Tyler, the 




— •• 




THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


49 


brawery of Sir William-Walworth, and Sir John 
Philpot, and the sanctimonious hypocrisy of John 
Northampton. To the lives of these mayors we 
therefore refer the reader for the events of this reign. 
Not long after the insurrection, under. Wat Tyler, 
a dangerous civil war broke out between the barons, 
under the duke of Gloucester and the monarch, in 
which the city took part with the barons. Sir 
Nicholas Bembre, late Mayor of London, and a 
favourite of the king, was found guilty of high 
treason, and executed at Tyburn by order of the 
Parliament, who had now triumphed over the 
monarch. The civil war being over, and conditions 
of peace entered into by the barons and the king, 
the latter applied to the city for the loan of a sum 
of money. This was not only peremptorily refused 
by the city, but a Lombard merchant, who offered 
to lend the sum, was inhumanly beaten. The king, 
in revenge for this, availed himself of the first oppor¬ 
tunity against the city, and committed the mayor 
and others to prison. The civic functionaries were 
also mulcted in heavy fines, and the liberties of the 
city seized. The city, notwithstanding the mag¬ 
nificent reception they gave the king subsequently, 
were compelled to pay the sum of 3000 marks for 
the restoration of their privileges, and a further sum 
of <£10,000 for the right of electing their mayor. 
King Richard arrived in London in 1396, with his 
young queen Isabella, then only eight years of age, 
when the citizens having met them on Blackheath, 


o 























50 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


escorted them into the city with great pomp. The 
next year, the king received the citizens on Black- 
heath. About this time the Duke of Hereford 
(afterwards Henry TV.) was invited by some of the 
barons to come over from France, and assume the 
sovereignty. Richard found himself, at this most 
critical period of his reign, deserted by the principal 
barons. He accepted the terms offered to him, 
and was afterwards perfidiously seized and confined 
in prison. The citizens, always ready to side with 
the victorious party, were so incensed against the 
unfortunate, king, on account of the various pun¬ 
ishments he had inflicted upon them (in many 
cases it must be said but too justly), that they 
met the duke of Hereford, desiring, in the name of 
all the citizens, to put the king to death. This 
barbarous request was, however, refused by the 
duke. The first act of Parliament, on the ac¬ 
cession of Henry, was to commit Richard to prison 
for the term of his natural life. Fie was at first 
sent to Leeds Castle, in Kent, but afterwards to 
that of Pontefract, where he was assassinated. 
Several of the dukes, bishops, and others, formed 
a plan for assassinating king Henry, by inviting 
him to a tournament. The plot, however, was 
discovered, and Henry threw himself upon the city. 
They soon mustered an army, and on the march 
of the conspirators from Oxford, awaited them on 
Hounslow-heath. But the rebel army, alarmed at 
the opposition of the king, dispersed themselves. 























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 51 

and their leaders being taken prisoners, the re¬ 
bellion was crushed. The king, in return for the, 
assistance rendered by the citizens, rewarded them 
with many privileges. 

In 1407, another dreadful pestilence visited the 
city, sweeping off 30,000 inhabitants, and being 
attended with a plentiful harvest, the price of wheat, 
from the want of an adequate consumption, fell to 
3s. 4d. a quarter. In March, 1410, John Badby, a 
follower of Wickliffe, was burnt in Smithfield, for 
alleged heresy; and the prince of Wales, who 
witnessed his murder, affected by his sufferings, 
offered him pardon and a pension for life, if he 
would recant; he resolutely refused, and sealed 
his testimony with his death. In the same year, 
the Guildhall was built. 

Henry having made a vow to visit the holy 
sepulchre at Jerusalem, prepared for the journey; 
but having repaired to St. Edmund’s shrine in 
Westminster Abbey, he was seized with illness, 
which, in a short time, ended in his death. His 
eldest son was immediately proclaimed king, under 
the title of Henry V. His previous dissolute life 
had prepared the citizens for the government of a 
bad monarch, but in this they were mistaken, for 
Henry applied his mind vigorously to the cares 
of the nation. A plot against his life was soon 
detected; and, by the aid of the citizens, the of¬ 
fenders were seized and punished. A bill having 
been moved in Parliament for seizing on the eccle- 








52 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


siastical benefices, the bishops, with the view of 
retarding the measure, persuaded the king to at¬ 
tempt the recovery of his French -dominions. The 
king acquiesced; and the result was, the battle of 
Agincourt, which was communicated by a king’s mes¬ 
senger to Nicholas Wotton, the Mayor of London, 
as he was riding to his inauguration. The event 
was celebrated by a solemn procession, on foot, to 
the shrine of St. Edward, at Westminster, in which 
the queen, nobility, and civic officers, took a part. 
On the return of the king with the French noblesse, 
his prisoners, the mayor and other dignitaries, with 
a splendid cavalcade, met him on Blackheath, and 
conducted him with great splendour to London. In 
this year, 1415, Sir Henry Barton, the mayor, first 
ordered lanterns to be hung out in the streets of 
London at night, an event far more beneficial to 
the city than the great victory which preceded it. 
The king’s coffers having been emptied by the late 
war, he was compelled to raise money by pawning 
his crown to the Bishop of Winchester for 20,000 
marks, and his jewels to the citizens of London for 
1000 marks. 

On the marriage of Henry with Catherine, 
daughter of the king of France, the mayor and 
principal citizens met him on his return to England, 
and accompanied him into the city in great state. 
Two years after this, Henry died in France, and his 
remains, which passed through the city in romantic 
splendour, were interred in Westminster Abbey. 

























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 53 

Henry VI., though only eight months old, was 
proclaimed king immediately on the death of his 
father, and, on Nov. 14, 1422, was carried in great 
state on his mother’s lap in an open chair through 
the city, to the Hall of Parliament at Westminster. 
The Dukes of Gloucester and Bedford, his uncles, 
were his guardians. A quarrel, however, occurred 
between the former and the Bishop of Winchester, 
his uncle; the bishop had formed a design to seize 
the city of London (then the first rallying place of 
all contending factions) on the night of Lord Mayor’s 
day, when the city, like Babylon of old, would be 
the scene of festivities; Gloucester, however, re¬ 
ceived intimation of the plot, and urged the mayor 
to make preparations for the safety of the city. In 
the morning, the bishop’s faction mustered at 
Southwark, and attempted to enter the city. The 
citizens, however, were prepared for them, but 
through the forbearance of John Coventry, the 
mayor* hostilities were stopped. The Duke of 
Bedford interposed, and peace was restored for a 
time. The young king, who had been crowned in 
Paris, as king of both France and England, having 
returned to his own country, was met on Black- 
heath by the mayor, and conducted to London; two 
days afterwards, the citizens presented him with one 
thousand pounds in a golden hamper. Shortly after 
this, through the exertions of Sir John Wells and 
Sir William Eastfield, both mayors of London, a 
more general supply of water was brought from 


\ 












54 THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 

Tyburn to the conduits of the city. The citizens, 
in 1435, in revenge for the revolt of the Duke of 
Burgundy, massacred many of his subjects and 
other foreigners—an act of brutality which was 
reprobated by Henry. The Duke having, in the 
following year, laid siege to Calais, the citizens 
raised a number of armed men at their own expense, 
by whose exertions, conjointly with the rest of the 
army, the siege was raised. A dreadful famine 
happened in 1438, which reduced the poor to exist 
on fern-roots and berries; the calamity was some¬ 
what softened in London by the judicious care 
of Stephen Brown, the mayor, who sent for large 
freights of rye from Prussia. A quarrel of a very 
singular nature occurred in the following year, 
between the city and the dean and chapter of St. 
Martin’s-le-Grand. A prisoner, on his way from 
Newgate to Guildhall, was rescued from the offi¬ 
cers by his comrades, who took “sanctuary” in St. 
Martin’s.. The sheriffs forcibly took the prisoner 
and his companions from thence. The dean and 
chapter complained to the king of the invasion of 
their privileges, and the prisoners were ultimately 
ordered back to the fe sanctuary.” Humphrey, the 
good Duke of Gloucester, was murdered in 1447, 
to the great regret of the citizens. About this time 
the first efforts in the cause of education were made 
by four clergymen of the city of London, who peti¬ 
tioned Parliament for liberty to establish schools. 
The king immediately granted their request. 





























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


55 


In 1450, the celebrated rebellion of Jack Cade 
took place. Cade having mustered a body of pea¬ 
santry, marched to Blackheath; the king sent an 
army against him, and Cade pretended to retreat. 
The king, entrapped by this artifice, sent a detach¬ 
ment under the command of Sir Humphrey Stafford, 
to Seven Oaks. Cade, by means of an ambuscade, 
succeeded in cutting off Stafford and his detach¬ 
ment. Flushed with success, he marched to Lon¬ 
don, where he committed various acts of barbarity. 
The citizens growing weary of his brutal acts, shut 
the gates of the city against his band, and, in his 
attempt to force the gates, defeated him. Shortly 
afterwards, his army deserted him, and he, being 
discovered in a garden at Hothfield, in Sussex, was 
killed. Godfrey Fielding, the mayor, at this period 
was, for his conduct, raised to the rank of a privy 
counsellor. John Norman, the mayor, in 1455, first 
adopted the custom of going by water to West¬ 
minster in a state barge on the day of installa¬ 
tion. The remaining events of this reign are not 
worthy of particular notice ; they consisted chiefly 
of riots which kept the city in a continued state of 
agitation. In the meantime, an army was raised 
against the king, by the Earls of Warwick, March, 
&c.; which, after being alternately victorious and 
defeated, at last succeeded in dethroning the king, 
and appointing the Earl of March under the title 
of Edward IV. One of the first acts of the 
new monarch was to put to death an eminent 



















56 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


grocer, named Walter Warwick, for inadvertently 
saying that his son was heir to the crown , meaning 
his own house which bore that sign. By a charter 
issued in the second year of his reign, Edward 
granted to the city the following important privi¬ 
leges :—First. The mayor, recorder, and alderman, 

« 

past the chair, were to become permanent justices 
of the peace. Second. They were also freed from 
serving all subordinate civic offices. Third. The 
annexation, to a certain extent, of Southwark. 

A fashion having sprung up of wearing shoes, 
whose toes turned up to a monstrous length, a 
proclamation was made that such toes were not 
to exceed two inches in length, on pain of excom¬ 
munication, and a forfeiture of twenty shillings by 
the wearer. 

Sir Thomas Cook, late Lord Mayor, having been 
unjustly impeached for high treason, was condemned 
to pay a fine of <£8000 to the king, 800 marks to 
the queen, and the loss of a large amount of his 
property. 

In 1469, the Earl of Warwick raised a powerful 
army, and having surprised the king, imprisoned 
him; Edward, however, escaped, and having mus¬ 
tered a powerful force, returned to London. He 
was soon compelled to fly to Holland, and the 
late monarch, Henry, after an imprisonment of six 
years, was liberated, and again proclaimed king. 
The chances of war soon restored Edward to the 
throne, and Henry was again shut up in a dungeon. 







THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


57 


After suppressing various other dangerous riots, 
Edward enjoyed, during the remainder of his life, a 
short interval of peace. In 1482, the king invited 
the mayor and citizens to a grand hunt in Waltham 
Chase, where a great number of red and fallow deer 
were killed by the civic Nimrods. 

The treatment of the young king Edward V., by 
his uncle, Richard Duke of Gloucester, is too well- 
known to need mention here. The latter having 
caused himself to be declared protector, beheaded 
Hastings, and succeeded, by cunning and force, in 
obtaining the crown of England. The events in 
the history of Richard III. bear no important re¬ 
lation to the interests of the city, and we pass over 
them, therefore, in silence. The Earl of Richmond, 
having at Richard’s death, succeeded to the crown, 
under the title of Henry VII., the Lord Mayor and 
aldermen met him at Hornsey Park, and accom¬ 
panied him to the city, where he was received in 
due form. One of his first acts was to borrow of 
the city 3,000 marks, which, mirabile dictu , he 
punctually paid back. This, however, was only 
a transient gleam of generosity; for he soon became 
odious to the city by the taxes he levied on them, 
and the fines he exacted from the citizens under 
the most nefarious pretexts. A rebellion of the 
Cornish men under Lord Audley, in 1497, was with 
some little difficulty suppressed. The early days 
of Henry VIII. were unstained by any of those acts 
of voluptuous cruelty which characterized his later 




58 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


life. Disguised as a yeoman of the guard, he came 
into the city on St. John’s Eve, 1510, to see the 
“ pompous march of the city watchand being 
much pleased with it, attended shortly afterwards 
with his consort to witness a repetition of these 
mummeries. A riot, which broke out on evil 
May-day, was attended with some disastrous conse¬ 
quences, the London apprentices having plundered 
the houses of several foreigners, and committed 
other atrocities. The tumult was, however, sup¬ 
pressed, and the rioters punished. Henry being 
in want of money. Cardinal Wolsey issued com¬ 
missions in the king’s name, for levying the sixth 
part of the goods and chattels of the laity, and 
the fourth part of those of the clergy. The city, 
however, refused to submit to this monstrous impo¬ 
sition ; and, in the end, it was abandoned. A war 
with Spain, then the great market for broad cloths, 
caused a complete stagnation, by which the mer¬ 
chants of London suffered considerably. Henry, 
being desirous of repudiating queen Catherine, his 
consort, a court sat in Blackfriars, to determine the 
legality of the marriage. In the same year (1529), 
proclamation was made in London, prohibiting all 
intercourse with the subjects of the Pope, in conse¬ 
quence of the quarrel between Henry and the sove¬ 
reign pontiff. Two years afterwards, on the appear¬ 
ance of Tindal’s translation of the New Testament 
into the vernacular tongue, Stokesley, Bishop of 
London, bought up all the copies he could procure. 







THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


59 


and caused them to be burnt at Paul’s Cross. .A 
quarrel afterwards originated between this worthy 
prelate and his equally worthy followers, the 
clergy, who, on his demanding a sum of money 
(required by Henry as a satisfaction for having 
attempted to thwart his purposes), forced them¬ 
selves into his chapter-house, and beat his servants. 

In 1532, a general muster of the citizens was 
held at Mile End, when a census was taken of 
all capable of bearing arms, and also of the im¬ 
plements of war belonging to the city. On the 
occasion of Henry’s marriage with the unfortunate 
Anne Boleyn, the Lord Mayor, at the command of 
the king, made arrangements for her reception in a 
style of magnificence unsurpassed by any previous 
event. In return for this extravagant splendour, the 
king invited the Lord Mayor, aldermen, and princi¬ 
pal citizens, to the christening of his daughter, the 
princess Elizabeth. In June, 1535, Bishop Fisher 
and Sir Thomas More were executed on Tower 
Hill for refusing to take the oath according to the 
act of succession. In 1536, scarcely three years 
after she had been made a bride, the unfortunate 
Anne Boleyn fell a victim to the hate of the brutal 
king, being executed in the Tower. 

An extraordinary circumstance is recorded on the 
annals of the common council, (about 1539), which 
is only explicable on the supposition that the subject 
of it was a man of extraordinary judgment and 
integrity. It was an order that one Paul Wythyn 




60 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Poole should be present at all its meetings, as well 
as at the elections of mayors and sheriffs. Anne, of 
Cleves, the next consort of Henry VIII. was at 
this time received into London with a display of 
pomp almost equal to that which welcomed her 
unfortunate predecessor. In 1542, the sheriffs of 
London were called to the bar of the house of com¬ 
mons, and committed to prison in the Tower, for re¬ 
fusing to obey the order of that house for the libera¬ 
tion of George Ferrers, member for Plymouth, who 
had been arrested in the city for debt. The task of 
paving London, a work exceeding the pyramids in 
importance, and still more in usefulness, which had 
been partially commenced, was in the year 1543, 
carried out to a large extent. In the next year, the 
king being in want of money to carry on the war 
in Scotland, borrowed of the different companies of 
London the sum of <£21,263 6s. 8d. Not being 
satisfied with this vast sum, he endeavoured to raise 

• 

a further amount, by way of gift, or as it was then 
termed, “ benevolence.” Richard Reed, an aider- 
man, having positively refused to grant the sum 
demanded of him, was cruelly sentenced to serve in 
the army in Scotland as a common soldier. Not¬ 
withstanding this infamous conduct on the part of 
the king, we find the city, a short time afterwards, 
raising, at its own expense, a regiment of foot, one 
thousand strong, to reinforce the army of France. 
Shortly before the death of the haughty sovereign, 
the Earl of Surrey was, after a pretended trial before 


























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 61 

Martin Bowes, the Lord Mayor, condemned to death 
for high treason. On the accession of Edward VI., 
in 1546, he was received in the city in a very cordial 
manner. Some serious differences occurred with 
the Duke of Somerset the (protector), the Earl of 
Warwick, and others, which were fortunately recti¬ 
fied by the wisdom of the court of common council. 
Mary, queen of Scotland, on her return from France 
to her own country, in 1550, was sumptuously enter¬ 
tained in London by the mayor and citizens. After 
the death of Somerset, who was executed on Tower 
Hill in 1552, the nation continued quiet till the 
death of Edward. The city, at first, sided with 
the Lady Jane Grey; but afterwards, finding the 
nation generally predisposed in favour of Mary, 
they proclaimed her in Cheap^ide. On the break¬ 
ing out of Sir Thomas Wyat’s rebellion, the citi¬ 
zens, at the solicitation of the queen, supplied a 
body of five hundred men to march against Wyat. 
The city troops, however, on a speech from their 
commander Brett, revolted, and joined the party of 
Wyat, which directed its march towards London. At 
this alarming crisis, Mary repaired to Guildhall, and 
addressed the citizens, urging them to defend her 
cause. Wyat, however, failed in his attack on the 
city, and being persuaded to surrender, was executed. 
The subsequent events of Mary’s dark career bear 
no relation to the history of the city; the only 
incident worth recording, being the disasters of the 
army in France, and the loss of Calais, which occa- 







62 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


sioned the queen to borrow of the city a loan of 
<£20,000 towards carrying on the war. The acces¬ 
sion of Elizabeth was hailed with feelings of delight 
by the citizens, who received her in a very splendid 
manner, and presented her with a thousand marks 
in gold. The citizens were, the same year (1559), 
mustered in Greenwich Park before the queen. In 
1561, a large portion of St. Paul’s cathedral was 
consumed by fire, in consequence of the building 
being struck by lightning. Two years after, the 
plague broke out in the city, and, in the course 
of one year, swept off upwards of 20,000 persons. 
A short time afterwards, that distinguished man. 
Sir Thomas Gresham, proposed to his fellow-citizens 
to found a bourse for the merchants; for the cir¬ 
cumstances connected with which, the reader is 
referred to his life. In 1569, the first lottery in 
England was drawn at the west door of St. Paul’s 
church-yard. The events which followed were 
principally of a miscellaneous character, and relate 
to matters which have little interest to the general 
reader. 

In the midst of rejoicings and festivities, the 
queen did not forget to urge upon the citizens the 
necessity of preparing for war; and, by virtue of her 
order to the Lord Mayor, the younger members of 
the community were trained in the art of war. In 
1585, preparations were made in anticipation of the 
invasion of the Spaniard's, and the city contributed 
5000 men towards the defence of the country. In 
























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 63 

December, 1586, the painful duty devolved upon 
the mayor of proclaiming the sentence of death on 
Mary, queen of Scots, who had been condemned 
for conspiring against Queen Elizabeth. At a later 
period of the Spanish invasion, the queen demanded 
of the city a contingent of 10,000 men, which were 
immediately raised by the different wards. They 
also fitted out sixteen large ships, and four pinnaces. 
Various supplies of men were afterwards contri¬ 
buted at different periods ; and, on one occasion, the 
city raised and armed a body of 1000 men in the 
space of a single afternoon. On the breaking out of 
the revolt under the Earl of Essex, that unfortunate 
nobleman endeavoured to bring the citizens over to 
him; but finding no response, he grew desperate, 
was deserted by his followers, and ultimately taken 
prisoner at his own house, in the Strand. His 
tragic end, it is well known, had a powerful effect 
on the mind of Elizabeth, who did not long survive 
him. James I. came to the throne in 1603, and 
entered London in the customary state of splen¬ 
dour. He had not reigned many months before 
he applied to the city for a loan of <£60,000, 
which was immediately granted. In 1606, James, 
after dining with the clothworkers’ company, con¬ 
sented to accept the freedom of that company, 
which was then presented to him. In the same 
year, he applied to the city for a further loan of 
<£60,000, which was granted. In consideration of 
these loans, he granted the city various charters in 







64 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


confirmation of their ancient liberties. Next year 
the king offered the city the privilege of. founding an 
English colony, in the province of Ulster, Ireland. 
The city accepted the offer, and raised a sum of 
<£20,000 for the purposes of carrying out the en- 
terprize. The increase of the population of the city 
about this time, led our over-cautious ancestors 
to dread the occurrence of a famine: the Lord 
Mayor, to obviate such a calamity, caused twelve 
new granaries, capable of holding 6000 quarters of 
corn, to be erected at Bridewell. In the year 1613, 
Sir Hugh Middleton completed his great work of 
supplying the city with water from the new river, at 
Ware, in Hertfordshire. Another great work, at 
this time, was the paving of Smithfield, which, in 
consequence of its great use as a cattle market, was 
rendered all but impassable. By a charter granted 
at this time, the right of meting coal, and receiving 
thereon a fee of 8d. per ton, was granted to the city. 
In 1617, many of the bishops applied to the king 
for liberty for the people to divert themselves on 
a Sunday; and the king, accordingly, sanctioned 
the “ Book of Sports,” but many of the incumbents 
refusing to read it in their churches, were sus¬ 
pended and imprisoned. In return for this, the Lord 
Mayor ordered the king’s carriages to be stopped 

as they passed through the city, at the time of 

* 

divine service. The mayor, however, afterwards 
became more submissive on receiving an order 
from the king himself. In 1620, the kins* de- 





THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


65 


manded of the city the sum of <£20,000 to assist 
his son-in-law, the Elector Palatine. The city 
thought the demand too exorbitant, but voted the 
king half the amount, and afterwards raised for 
the same purpose, a force of two thousand soldiers. 
Charles I. succeeded to the throne at an unfor¬ 
tunate period. The plague, from which London 
was seldom free, then raged within its walls, and 
carried off, within one year, more than thirty- 
five thousand persons. Almost the first public 
act of Charles, was a violation of the principles of 
the constitution. A war broke out with France, 
and the Parliament having refused to vote sup¬ 
plies, Charles dissolved it, and demanded of the 
city a loan of £100,000. This was refused, and he 
then demanded that twenty ships should be fitted 
out with provisions for three months. After some 
delay, these were granted. The king visited this 
refusal to advance the loan, by fine and imprison¬ 
ment on many of the principal citizens. Notwith¬ 
standing the evil feeling thus generated against 
the king, he was a few years afterwards (1633), 
invited to a very splendid masquerade, by the 
barristers in the inns of court; the expense of 
which amounted to £21,000. In the following 
year, the celebrated impost of ship money, a tax 
raised by Charles without the consent of Parlia¬ 
ment, was proposed, and the king sent a writ to the 
city calling upon them to prepare, and victual a 
certain number of ships. The common council im- 


i 




























66 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


mediately petitioned the king against this demand. 
The king, however, persisted in raising the impost,. 
and on account of their refusal to pay the sums 
demanded of them, many of the citizens were com¬ 
mitted to prison. These and other arbitrary pro¬ 
ceedings, enforced by the tyrannical Star Chamber, 
tended still further to widen the breach between 
Charles and his subjects. A prosecution was in¬ 
stituted, in 1639, against the city, for alleged 
abuses in Ulster; in consequence of which, the Star 
Chamber ordered the forfeiture of the Irish estates 
granted in the previous reign, and also amerced 
the city in a fine of £5 0,000. This penalty was 
remitted by the king; but the citizens were highly 
exasperated at such tyrannical proceedings. The 
Parliament passed resolutions condemning the con¬ 
duct of the Star Chamber, and discharging the city 
from the judgment of that court. The arbitrary 
enactments of the monarch still continued, par¬ 
ticularly towards the city; he applied for loans of 
money, and upon a refusal to advance them, im¬ 
prisoned the refractory citizens. Matters went on 
in this manner for some time, the gulf between 
the monarch and the Parliament daily growing 
wider, till the dissatisfaction of the people mani¬ 
fested itself in open rebellion. The facts connected 
with the civil war belong more to the history of 
the nation than to that of any particular city, or 
even of the metropolis, though the part taken by 
London in the matter was far from unimportant. 



























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 67 

t 

The citizens maintained their allegiance to the 
king, notwithstanding his tyrannical proceedings, 
till the crisis of revolt came, and then they sided 
with the parliament. The result is but tOo well 
known. The unfortunate monarch, after a length¬ 
ened war with his subjects, was taken prisoner, 
and ultimately beheaded at Whitehall. The com¬ 
monwealth being established, an act was passed 
for the exheredation of the royal line, and the 
abolition of the monarchy. This act Sir Abraham 
Reinardson the Lord Mayor, and Aldermen Adams, 
Langham, and Bance, refused to publish, and were 
in consequence committed to the Tower. Reinard¬ 
son was also degraded from the mayoralty, and 
condemned to pay a fine of <£2000, and further, 
to be imprisoned in the Tower for two months. 
Shortly after this, the Parliament applied to, and 
obtained from, the city, a loan of £120,000 for 
the use of the army in Ireland. The House of 
Commons was also sumptuously entertained by the 
city at Christ Church. The history of the city 

during the protectorate of Cromwell, and after- 

\ 

wards in the short reign of his son Richard, is not 
of a character to deserve notice. Oliver appears to 
have been on good terms with the citizens, and 
entertainments of a mutual kind were given by the 
protector and the citizens. When the restoration 
of the House of Stuart was proposed, the civic 
authorities wisely declined taking part with either 
party ; and this preservation of strict neutrality 





68 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


was highly advantageous to them. As matters, 
however, ripened for the restoration, they were 
less careful of adopting a decisive line of conduct; 
and, on the approach of Charles II., they unani¬ 
mously declared in his favour. Their first act 
was to restore Richmond Park to the crown, which 
had been granted to the city some years before, 
by Cromwell. The two great events in the reign 
of this monarch, were those known as the “ great 
plague,” and the “ great fire.” The former, which 
had frequently committed such fearful ravages in 
the city, again broke out in May, 1665, and des¬ 
troyed 68,596 persons. The sufferings of the peo¬ 
ple at this awful period, have been well described 
in the celebrated work of Defoe. The “ great fire” 
broke out on Sept. 2, 1666, and continued to "rage 
for three days, in which time it denuded 466 
acres of land; of houses, amounting in number to 
13,200; 90 churches and chapels, the cathedral 

of St. Paul’s, Guildhall, the Royal Exchange, Cus¬ 
tom House, and various other public buildings. 
The loss was estimated at <£10,730,500; fortu¬ 
nately, only six persons lost their lives. These 
two fearful catastrophes were not lost upon the in¬ 
habitants of London. They were punishments for 
the neglect of the physical laws, and the citizens 
now began to perceive the folly of their ancestors, 
in building close and imperfectly ventilated streets, 
and in erecting their houses of such combustible 
materials. These lessons, terrible as they were, had 






















THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


69 


a good effect. Since that time, the city has been 
free alike from “great fires,” and great “plagues.” 
Charles, on the occurrence of the fire, issued an 
order, that no houses should be re-constructed till 
proper arrangements had been made with regard 
to the sanatory condition of the future city. The 
designs of Sir Christopher (then Dr.) Wren for 
rebuilding the city, were of that comprehensive 
character, both as regarded healthfulness and 
architectural uniformity, to have left nothing to 
be desired; but the obstinacy of the landowners 
and lessees of the old buildings was allowed to 
prevail, and this noble idea of a great city was 
abandoned. Sir John Evelyn also proposed an 
admirable plan for rebuilding the city, in which 
his remarks on the evils of burying-places in 
crowded cities are worthy of all praise; the causes 
before alluded to, however, compelled this scheme 
also to be abandoned. War having broke out with 
the Dutch, and Charles having applied the money 
voted for the national defences to his own private 
use, the coast remained unprotected, and the 
Dutch Admiral Dekuyter sailed up the Medway, 
and destroyed the fort of Sheerness, with several 
ships of war. The rebuilding of the city would 
appear to have been nearly completed in the year 
1673. 

In 1679, in consequence of an alleged plot to 
set fire to the city, all the Roman Catholics 
resident in London, were banished ten miles from 




















70 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


thence. Shortly afterwards, Lord Stafford was 
condemned to death for participation in this plot. 
The citizens, suspecting that the Duke of York 
was favourable to the Roman. Catholic religion, 
convened a meeting to consider the propriety of 
opposing his right of succession to the crown ; but 
the meeting was forbidden by the Privy Council. 
The dispute between the coprt and the city, led to 
some extraordinary proceedings. Sir John Moore, 
Lord Mayor in 1682, being favourable to the court 
party, insisted upon his right to nominate one of 
the sheriffs, knowing that the king had previously 
exerted himself to obtain the appointment of his 
own nominees; and even went so far as to choose 
a sheriff, and issue a precept for swearing him in. 
The citizens stoutly resisted this, and elected 
sheriffs of their own selection. The court party, 
by dint of the most tyrannical proceedings, were, 
however, successful; Alderman Pilkington, for an 
alleged libel on the Duke of York, was fined 
<£100,000; and the court finding the citizens still 
contumacious, obtained a quo warranto to seize 
the city charter. The judges decided against 
the city; but, in such an ambiguous manner, as 
to prove they were afraid to come to a definitive 
verdict. The citizens were at last compelled to sue 
the king for pardon, which was granted on certain 
conditions. Soon after these tyrannical proceed¬ 
ings, the “ merrie monarch” died, and the Duke of 
York succeeded him, under the title of James II. 

























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 71 

His first act was to avenge the prosecution against 
the Roman Catholics, which he did by executing, 
in a barbarous manner, Alderman Cornish, who 
had taken an active part in detecting the Rye- 
house plot, even denying this unfortunate man time 
for his defence, by which his innocence would have 
been clearly shown. In the very same year, 1685, 
the unfortunate Duke of Monmouth was beheaded 
on Tower Hill. 

In 1687, in consequence of the persecutions of the 
French Protestants, 13,500 emigrants of that per¬ 
suasion settled in England. Notwithstanding the 
restoration of the city charter, the enmity against 
the king on the part of the city was so bitter, that 
on the landing of the Prince of Orange, who had 
been solicited to accept the crown, the lords met in 
Guildhall, and declared in favour of that prince. 
The result is well known ; James, after a vain 
attempt to maintain his power, fled the kingdom, 
and the Prince of Orange was proclaimed under 
the title of William III. The city immediately 
granted him a loan of <£200,000, of which, the 
Lord Mayor, Sir Samuel Dashwood, himself ad¬ 
vanced £60,000. The king and his consort shortly 
afterwards dined in the city at Guildhall; and such 
is the immutability of law, the proceedings on the 
quo warranto were reversed by order of Parlia¬ 
ment, and the city restored to all its ancient privi¬ 
leges. 

It would appear that between the reigns of 






72 THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 

Richard I. and Richard II., the city had paid for 
their privileges the sum of 34,000 marks, besides 
,£20,000, some valuable presents of jewellery, and 
one fifteenth of their moveable property. The 
power of the city at this time (1690), may be 
judged of, from the fact, that there being some 
apprehension that the French would land on the 
coast, the citizens informed the king, that in addi¬ 
tion to the trained bands, which consisted of 9000 
men, they were ready to raise six regiments of foot, 
a large regiment of horse, and one thousand dra¬ 
goons, and to maintain this force entirely for a 
month, or a longer period, if necessary. In 1692, 
on the 8th of September, the shock of an earth¬ 
quake was felt in the city and parts adjacent, but 
did no particular damage. In 1693, another loan 
of £300,000 was granted to the queen in the 
absence of the king, who was conducting the war 
in the Netherlands. 

The year 1694, disclosed an infamous system of 
bribery; which, being investigated by the House 
of Commons, it was proved that one thousand 
guineas had been demanded, and taken from the 
chamberlain of London by Sir John Trevor, the 
speaker, for forwarding the Orphan bill; and in 
consequence of which, he was expelled the house; 
other bribes had been also taken by different 
persons. On the death of the queen the city 
sent a letter of condolence to his majesty. In 
the year 1697, a measure of great utility to the 









THE HISTORY OF LONDON. ' 73 

metropolis was carried into execution. Various 
places, to which, before the Reformation, the privi¬ 
lege of sanctuary was attached, and by the lapse of 
time so far degenerated from their original destina¬ 
tion, as to become receptacles for unprincipled and 
lawless persons, -who fled to them as places of re¬ 
fuge from justice and legal authority. The evils 
thus produced grew so enormous, as to demand 
the interference of the legislature ; and an act of 
parliament was passed, by which all the following 
places of abused privilege were suppressed: viz., 
the Sanctuary in the Minories; those in the neigh¬ 
bourhood of Fleet-street, as Salisbury-court, White- 
friars, Ram-alley, and Mitre-court; Fulwood’s-rents, 
in Holborn; and Baldwin’s-gardens, in Gray’s-inn- 
lane; the Savoy in the Strand; and Montague- 
close, Deadman’s-place, the Clink, and the Mint, 
in Southwark. This last place, however, through 
the supineness of the magistracy, was suffered to 
reassume its former character, and that with in¬ 
creased profligacy; nor was it finally suppressed 
till the reign of George I. In 1700, party spirit 
was again active in circulating rumours to the 
effect, that the papists and other disaffected per¬ 
sons had secretly stirred up arms; in consequence 
of which, they were again banished the cities of 
London and Westminster. 

On the proclamation of the Pretender, in the 
following year, the citizens voted an address to his 
majesty expressive of the indignity they felt at such 


K 



























74 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON, 


an act. On March 8, 1702, King William III. died, 
and Anne of Denmark, the daughter of James II., 
succeeded to the throne. An address was imme¬ 
diately presented to the queen, who afterwards 
dined with the Lord Mayor and corporation at' 
Guildhall ; and, after the dinner, conferred the 
order of knighthood on four of the principal citi- 
• zens. Public thanksgivings and rejoicings fol- 

WM ■ 

lowed on the receipt of the intelligence of the 
victories of Marlborough over the French. On 
the 26th Nov. 1703, the city was visited with the 
most fearful storm on record. The damage done 
to the houses in the city was incalculable; at sea 
twelve men-of-war were lost, with 1800 sailors, 
besides an immense number of merchants’ ships; 
and, even in the Thames, from London Bridge to 
Limehouse, only four ships were able to ride out the 
storm. In consequence of the damage to houses, 
tiles rose from 21s. to £6 per 1000. The next year, 
the city entertained the Duke of Marlborough on* 
his return from the Continent. The act of union 
between England and Scotland was completed in 
1706, and led to a general thanksgiving at St. 
Paul’s. The success of the French in Germany, in 
1709, having driven twelve thousand emigrants to 
this country, a general collection was made, and 
more than <£22,000 paid into the chamber of 
London for their relief. A very dangerous riot 
occurred soon afterwards, in consequence of a pre¬ 
judice of the mob, urged on by some of the citizens; 





THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


75 


the result of which was, the rebels demolished 
several Presbyterian chapels. The riot was only 
suppressed by the intervention of an armed force. 
Some years afterwards, the curious Were gratified 
by seeirpg four chiefs of the Troquois Indians, who 
came on a visit to her majesty. In consequence of 
the efforts made by some person, in 1713, to sup¬ 
port the claims of the Pretender, a sum of £5000 
was offered for his apprehension. George I. having 
succeeded to the throne, on the death of Anne, was 
received into the city with every possible demon¬ 
stration of loyal respect; and, shortly afterwards, 
dined with the mayor and corporation at Guildhall. 
The breaking out of the rebellion in Scotland, and 
its suppression, led the city to present various suit¬ 
able addresses to the monarch. A remarkable phe¬ 
nomenon occurred in 1716, that of the river being 
so exhausted of water, as to allow persons to pass 
over its bed dry-shod, both above and below 
London Bridge. About the year 1719, the great 
South Sea scheme, or bubble, as is not inaptly 
termed, plunged thousands into misery. A scheme 
for paying off the National Debt, amounting at that 
time to about £31,000,000, was proposed by the 
South Sea Company. The directors proposed to 
take this debt; and, as a quid pro quo , to pay about 
<£7,000,000 per annum into the exchequer. The 
scheme was ratified by a thoughtless parliament, and 
became law. The bait took; the funds rose rapidly, 
and the directors ordered books to be opened for 





































76 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the subscription of £2,250,000, the £100 shares 
being issued at <£300 or £200 premium. The shares 
subsequently rose to £2300 per cent., and the whole 
commercial world ran mad upon the speculation. 
Books were opened for a further subscription of 
£4,000,000 which were sold at <£200 per cent., 
the original <£100 shares bearing a premium of 
<£1,100. The bubble burst shortly afterwards— 
thousands of once wealthy families were involved 
in ruin. At the same time, many schemes were 
propounded with a similar attempt; some of which 
though scoffed at by that age, have since become 
profitable investments for the capitalists; amongst 
these were the idea of fire insurance, and the Green¬ 
land whale fisheries; good and bad, however, shared 
the same fate in the general panic that followed. 
It is curious to find schemes for “ making butter 
from beech-trees,” “ curing the gout and stone,” 
“ making deal boards of saw-dust,” alongside of life 
insurances; the improvement of manufactures, the 
erection of turnpikes, and the paving of London’s 
streets. The capital involved in these enterprises 
would (if they had succeeded) have amounted to 
£300,000,000; but such was the gullibility of the 
age, that even the schemes “ for an Arcadian 
colony,” and “ to learn wise men to cast nativities,” 
were realised in shares bearing premiums of <£200, 
£300, and £400 per cent.; conspiracies, said to 
emanate from the Papists, still continuing, a re¬ 
turn was ordered of the various heroes within the 

































THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


77 


bills of mortality, which might be available in the 
event of a domestic war; and it appeared they 
amounted in number to about 20,000. In 1726, a 
daring attempt was made by some criminals, under 
sentence of death in Newgate, to seize the prison. 
The keepers were compelled to fire on the prisoners 
before they would submit. King George II. suc¬ 
ceeded to the throne in 1727; but his reign was 
not marked- by any extraordinary incident. Their 
majesties were witnesses, from a balcony in Cheap- 
side, of the splendour of the Lord Mayor’s Show. 
The next year presented a remarkable proof of the 
very imperfect condition of the police of the city: a 
deliberate design was formed to rob her Majesty in 
St. Paul’s Church-yard, as she returned from the 
city. The thieves, however, were busily engaged 
in robbing Alderman Sir Gilbert Heathcote, at 
the time the queen passed, and she escaped their 
hands. In 1743, war was declared against France; 
and various addresses were presented to his ma¬ 
jesty on that occasion by the city, and other cor¬ 
porate bodies. The intelligence of the rebellion, in 
1745, and of the success of the movement, alarmed 
the citizens, who made every preparation in the 
event of an attack upon the city. So great was the 
enthusiasm of the age, that even the very lawyers 
formed themselves into a regiment under the com¬ 
mand of Lord Chief Justice Willes. The Preten¬ 
der’s forces, however, were s6on defeated; and the 
unfortunate noblemen Kilmarnock and Balmerino, 

























78 


THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


who had espoused his cause, were executed in Aug. 
1746, on Tower-Hill. The needless bloody sacri¬ 
fices consequent upon this rebellion, continued till 
the following year, when Lord Lovat was also ex¬ 
ecuted on Tower-Hill; even so late as the year 
1753, Dr. Cameron was executed at Tyburn, for 
being a partizan of the Pretender. 

Having now brought the reader to the close of 
the reign of George II., at the middle of the last 
century, it may be as well to conclude the narrative 
here. In the course of this very brief summary of 
events, nothing like a history of the city has been 
attempted; for even the meanest abridgment of 
such a work would have been, in the present book, 
far too extensive a subject. The only object of the 
writer has been to show that connexion in the lead¬ 
ing events of the history of the city, which would 
enable the reader to understand the position in 
which those eminent men, whose lives are chroni¬ 
cled in these pages, found society, and the impres¬ 
sion which their energies produced upon it. To 
have carried the history to a later period, would 
have answered no good purpose. With the close of 

the rebellion in Scotland, terminated the romance of 

\ 

history, as far as the city is concerned; the subse¬ 
quent progress of society has done much to arrest 
all direct political power from the city, and other 
large corporate towns. Centralization of power in 
the executive of the country, appears to be a neces¬ 
sary result of civilization; for, however the people 



























THE HISTORY OF LONDON. 


79 


may have the power of willing, the execution of the 
acts willed, must remain with the executive ; for this 
reason, the city has not, in modern times, taken that 
stern lead in deciding the history of the nation, 
which it was wont to do in more remote ages; its 
power of acting has been sensibly diminished year 
by year; but its power of willing, or in other words, 
the moral influence of a great and enlightened city, 
still remains, and may gather strength from day to 
day, from hour to hour, and even from moment to 
moment. 



















' 




. 

* 

' Mi; v M 




























































. 



































CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

Henry Fitz-Alwin, Lord Mayor . 1 

Sir William Walworth, Lord Mayor.3 

Sir Richard Whittington, Lord Mayor..28 

Sir John Crosby, Alderman.47 

Sir Edmond Shaw, Lord Mayor.64 

Robert Fabyan, Alderman.82 

Sir Bartholomew Read, Lord Mayor.93 

Sir John Rest, Lord Mayor.101 

Sir John Spencer, Lord Mayor.109 

Sir William Craven, Lord Mayor.114 

Sir Richard Gresham, Lord Mayor.118 

Sir John Gresham, Lord Mayor.125 

Sir Thomas Gresham . .. .ISO 

William Beckford, Esq., Lord Mayor.213 

William Gyll, Esq., Lord Mayor.225 

Sir Edward Osborne, Lord Mayor.230 

John Wilkes, Esq., Lord Mayor.231 

Sir William Fitzwilliam, Alderman.266 

Thos. Adams, John Langham and James Bance, Aldermen . 271 

Gregory de Rockesby, Esq., Lord Mayor. . . . . .274 

Sir Thomas White, Lord Mayor.282 














IV 


CONTENTS. 


Sir John Philpot, Lord Mayor. 

Sir Johan Woodcock, Lord Mayor . 

Robert Waithman, Esq., Lord Mayor . 

List of the Lord Mayors of London . 

List of the Sheriffs of London ...... 

Her Majesty Queen Victoria’s Visit to the City 


Preface. 

Introduction—The History of London . 


PAGE 

. 285 

. 290 

. 292 

. 297 

. 305 

. 318 

7 

9 














































ORDER OF THE ILLUMINATED ILLUSTRATIONS, 


ETC. 


Henry Fitz-Alwin, Lord Mayor (frontis.) 
Stationers’ Company. 

Merchant Taylors’ Company. 

Sadlers’ Company. 

Haberdashers’ Company. 

Skinners’ Company. 

Ironmongers’ Company. 

Goldsmiths’ Company. 

Grocers’ Company. 

Fishmongers’ Company. 

Cordwainers’ Company. 

Salters’ Company. 

Drapers’ Company. 

Three Views of the New Royal Exchange. 



























CinxMix. 

PUBLISHED BY ALEX” DANCERFIELD, AND 
EFFI NGHAIVl WILLSON. 










lanou a. 

PUBLISHED BY ALEX? DANCERF1ELD, AND 


EFFINGHAM WILLSON 

















% 




I 








ionium 

PUBLISHED BY ALEX? DANCERFIELD AND 
EFFINGHAM WILLSON 





X o itiunt 

PUBLISHED BY ALEX? DANGERFIELD AND 
EFFiNCHAM WILLSON 













































































CHROVC 


W St R. WOOD Cl t * 




f ^^4 

Mt if a 1 ’ 

lSjr 1 




l£rniJ)o n 

PUBLISHED BY AYLOTT AND JONES 

W &.Jt Woodcock, Printers 




















-w 


PUBLISHED BY AYLOTT AND JONES 



✓- 


Pfc 

V ^ «■» Ay V A "y A 

W 

- 


~W k R Wo ode c ck, Printers 















(&rl temtyz (tarmjjanu. 




A . 0ANO6-' 


JtLratj&ait 

PUBLISHED BY ALEX? DANGERFIELD AND 
EFFINGHAM WILSON. 





























■ 

















































%rmx% Comp a up. 









JUK 





i ^ 


-\ 






Irt 






\ N. 









_ />» X 




^ I 








PUBLISHED BY ALEX? DANGERF1ELD 8c 
EFFINGHAM WILSON 

















m 



A' 



1 n n b v n 

PUB° Br A/LOTT & J3N&S. 


,'V &-R VPoodcock. Printers 












PUB? BY AYLOTT a JONES 

W .Woodcock, "Printers 





I 



























D 





















































. 



























a nii. 



■rww> 


W SOFTWOODC( 


lliru&ou 

PUBLISHED BY AYLOTT AND JONES, 

W kit Woodcock, Printers 




















Hrapm Company. 




an Don 


PUBLISHED BY AYLCTT AND JONES 

X k R X oo (ic o ok . Printers 









0y>. 















































































» 



/ •/ ■//// /////: 














































































































/✓V/ 
































































































































LIVES 


OF 

ILLUSTRIOUS LORDS MAYORS 

AND 

ALDERMEN OF LONDON. 

HENRY FITZ-ALWIN, 

(FIRST LORD MAYOR OF LONDON.) 

In presenting to our readers an account of Henry Fitz-Alwin, 
first Lord Mayor of London, it may not be out of place to give 
a short sketch of the institution of the office. It appears from 
ancient records, that the first City of London, which existed 
under the joint government of the Britons, Romans, and Saxons, 
was destroyed, and left desolate, by an incursion of the Danes. 
But Alfred, King of the West Saxons, subsequently defeated the 
Danes, and completely routed them ; and having collected the 
inhabitants together from different parts, thoroughly repaired 
the city, and made his son-in-law Ethelred, Earl of Mercia, 
governor; at whose death the city and all other possessions of 
the Earl descended to King Edward, sirnamed the Elder, son 
of Alfred, who appointed portgraves or portreves to the. govern¬ 
ment of the city. (The Saxon word porte denotes a town, and 
gerefe a guardian or keeper.) 

Fabian, the historian, informs us, that these governors, toge¬ 
ther with the laws and customs which were then observed in 
the city, were duly registered in a book called the Doomsday 
Book, written in the Saxon tongue; but, in later days, the laws 
became changed, and the book became so defaced, as to be diffi¬ 
cult to read or understand ; so that it was thrown by and lost. 
































2 


HENRY FITZ-ALWIN. 


It appears, however, from records and registers connected 
with the ancient monastery of St. Alban’s, that the office of 
portreve was one of high honour and estimation, and second 
only to the highest functionary of the church. In these records, 
we are informed, that in the reign of King Edward, the last 
before the Conquest, Wolfegare was portgrave, as appears by 
the charter of the same king, in these words :— 

“Edward, King, greeteth Alfward, Bishop” (of London) “and 
Wolfegare my portgrave, and all the burgesses of London.” 

And in another charter as follows :— 

“ King Edward greeteth William, Bishop ; and Sweetman my 
portgrave.” 

And in another, to the Abbey of Chertsey, as follows :— 

“ To William, Bishop ; and Leofstane and Alffy, portgraves.” 

In the reign of William the Conqueror, William, Bishop of 
London, procured the king’s charter of liberties for the said 
William, Bishop, and Godfrey, portgrave, in the Saxon tongue, 
and turned into English, thus :— 

“ William, King, greeteth William, Bishop, and Godfrey, 
portgrave, and all the burgesses within London (French and 
English.) And I grant that they be all their law worth, that 
they were in Edward’s days the king. And I will that each 
child be his father’s heir. And I will not suffer that any man 
do you wrong : and God you keep.” 

In the reign of the Conqueror, the office of provost or chief 
magistrate under the portgrave, seems to have sprung up, as 
appears from the following :— 

“ In the reign of the Conqueror, and of William Rufus, God¬ 
frey de Magnaville was portgrave, and Richard de Par provost.” 

These portgraves are also in divers records called, vicecomites , 
viscounties, or sheriffs, as being under an earl. Some authors 
call them doomesmen , eldermen , or judges of the king’s court. 

William Fitz-Stephen, denoting the civic government in his 
time, hath these words : 

“ This city, even as Rome is divided into wards. It hath 
yearly sheriffs instead of consuls ; it hath the dignity of sena- 

































SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


3 


tors and aldermen ; and according to the quality of laws, hath 
several courts and general assemblies upon appointed days.” 

Thus much for the antiquity of sheriffs and aldermen ; and 
next we shall speak of bailiffs and of mayors. 

In the first year of King Richard I., the citizens of London 
obtained a charter, to be governed by two bailiffs , which bailiffs 
are in ancient deeds called sheriffs. And they also obtained a 
charter to have a mayor to be their principal governor and 
lieutenant of the city. 

The names of the first bailiffs entering into their office at the 
feast of St. Michael, the Archangel (Anno Domini, 1189) were 
Henry Cornehill and Richard Reynere. 

Their first mayor was Henry Fitz-Alwin, Draper, appointed 
by the said king. The office appears originally to have been 
conferred for life; for he enjoyed the honour from the first year 
of Richard I. (anno 1190), until the 15th of King John (anno 
1212) upwards of twenty-four years. 

In 1208, however, the citizens obtained a charter to choose a 
mayor for themselves annually ; but, from motives of esteem ? 
or some other cause, they did not avail themselves of this pri¬ 
vilege till the death of Henry Fitz-Alwin, which took place in 
1212, when he was succeeded by Roger Fitz-Alwin. 

Henry Fitz-Alwin was buried in the parish church of St. 
Mary Botliaw, near London Stone. 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH, 

(lord mayor). 

Sir William Walworth, twice Lord Mayor of the City of 
London, was one of the most remarkable individuals of the age 
in which he lived. Of his birth or parentage, no particulars 
have descended to us, though the former may be placed with 
tolerable accuracy about the year 1320. The modern suburb of 
Walworth, in the parish of Newington, is claimed as the place 
























SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


where he was horn. He followed the business of a fishmonger, 
and eventually became one of the wealthiest fish-merchants in 
the City. From the great demand for fish in the times of 
Catholic superstition, fish-selling formed one of the chief trades 
of the metropolis. Long prior to Walworth’s time the fish¬ 
mongers were virtually united as a brotherhood, though the 
company, as it now exists, formed by the junction of the two 
Companies of Salt Fishmongers and Stock Fishmongers, was 
not instituted till the year 1536, when it was incorporated by 
Henry VIII., under the name of the “ Wardens and Commonalty 
of the Mystery of Fishmongers.” The Salt Fishmongers had 
been first incorporated so early as 1433, the Stock Fishmongers 
not till 1509. 

From the earliest period we find the Fishmongers involved 
in disputes resulting from their encroachment upon the liberties 
of their fellow-subjects.* Their stalls or standings were prin¬ 
cipally on Fish Street Hill; and many wealthy individuals of the 

/ 

craft dwelt upon the spot, whose names shine conspicuously in 
the annals of civic honour. According to the ancient statutes of 
this Company, no fishmonger was allowed to purchase fish beyond 
certain boundaries,viz. “St. Thomas’s Chapel, on London-bridge, 
Baynard’s Castle, and Jordan’s Quay, near Billingsgate. No fish 
were to be bought from any boat, unless first brought to land ; 
and no fishmonger was to buy or sell any fresh fish before the 


* In 1290, in the reign of Edward I. they were fined 500 marks for being 
guilty of “fore-stalling;” and during the following century, so strong a pre¬ 
judice had been excited against them, from charges of fraudulent dealing, 
that, in 1382, the parliament enacted that no fishmonger for the future should 
be admitted Mayor of the City; a prohibition, which was removed in the 
following year. So strong was the popular prejudice against these traders, 
that in the parliament alluded to, Nicholas Exton, speaker for the Fish¬ 
mongers, “ prayed the king to receive him and the Company under the im¬ 
mediate royal protection, lest they might receive corporeal hurt.” The 
request originated from various street tumults, wherein the fishmongers were 
the objects of popular indignation and insult. There were, also, continual 
disputes between this Company and the Goldsmiths, in regard to precedence, 
so much so, indeed, that the Lord Mayor and Aldermen were obliged to repel 
the mutinous from the City by proclamation. 






















































SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 3 

conclusion of mass at the chapel upon the Bridge; but salt fish 
might be sold after prime”* 

The history of London in the age of which we speak, partakes 
so much of that of the nation generally, that to enter into even 
a slight detail of the life of any individual whose actions formed 
an important feature in its affairs, we must necessarily extend 
our limits beyond what our subject might appear more im¬ 
mediately to prescribe. 

The period in which Walworth lived, and in the transactions of 
which, he bore no undistinguished part, was remarkable for the 
splendour of the achievements gained by the English over 
enemies abroad. War was the only pursuit considered glorious 
by the nation, and to supply the continual drain of resources 
which such a state of things necessarily demanded, extortion and 
persecution on the part of those intrusted with the national 
executive, were unhesitatingly had recourse to. The people of 
London, while they regarded with pride and honour the lustre 
added to their country’s name by such splendid victories as 
that of “Neville Cross,” over the Scots at Durham, and those 
over the French at Cressy and Poictiers, were still, not unfre- 

* At this period Queenhithe was the principal landing place for fish and 
other cargoes ; and hence the reason of the locality of the fishmongers, and 
other merchants. In 1224, Henry III. directed the officers of the Tower 
to arrest the ships of the Cinque Ports which arrived in the river, and to 
compel them to bring to the Queen’s Hythe only ; and two years after¬ 
wards the same officers were ordered to seize all fish offered for sale at any 
other place. It 1345, ships and vessels landing at Downgate (Dowgate) 
were ordered to pay the same customs as if they rode at Queen Hithe. 
A century afterwards it was ordered that if two vessels came up at the 
same time, one should go to Billingsgate ; if three, two were to land their 
cargoes at the Queen’s Hithe, the other at Billingsgate, but always “the 
more” at Queen Hithe. At length, however, Billingsgate asserted its 
pre-eminence. Situated East of the bridge, it was naturally more con¬ 
venient for large vessels with topmasts than the other port. Eabyan, who 
wrote at the close of the fifteenth century, says that the customs of Queen 
Hithe had so fallen off in his time as to be worth but £15 a-year. A 
century later Stow speaks of it as being almost deserted. He confirms 
the superiority of Billingsgate, which, he says, “is now the largest water- 
gate on the river of Thames, and therefore the most frequented.” 




4 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


quently amongst the first to complain of the results which such 

military prowess generally entailed. 

Yet, although we often find the inhabitants of the metropolis 
standing forth in the van of their countrymen, in their endea¬ 
vours to overthrow the load of taxes with which they were 
encumbered, in the reign of Edward the Third, in no age does 
history record an example of similar devotion to a monarch on 
the part of his subjects. Courteous, affable, and eloquent; of a 
free deportment and agreeable conversation, Edward the Third 
had the art of commanding the affections of his subjects, without 
seeming to solicit popularity. He was a constitutional knight- 
errant ; and his example diffused the spirit of chivalry through 
the whole nation. In imitation of the monarch who delighted 
in tilts and tournaments, every individual betook himself to 
the exercise of arms, every breast glowed with emulation, every 
heart panted with the thirst of glory; and, when he took the 
field, there was not a soldier in his army who did not serve from 
sentiment, and fight for reputation.*' 

Not less beloved by the people of London in this age, than 

their king, was his son, the Prince of Wales, surnamed the 

* 

Black Prince, whose bravery was such that all Europe considered 
him the most invincible hero of his time. He never fought a 

* In connection with the mention of the chivalric sentiments of Edward 
III., and which forms, indeed, no unimportant feature of the age we are 
now describing, it might be here noticed that, in the year 1349, having 
adorned his favourite castle of Windsor with new fortifications, and built 
the chapel which he dedicated to the Virgin Mary, St. George, and St. 
Edward the Confessor, the king founded a military order of St. George, 
the patron of England. A garter of blue velvet, inscribed “ Honi soit qui 
mal y pense,” was the symbol of union chosen for this noble fraternity, 
which, from hence, was styled the Order of the Garter, consisting of the 
King of England as sovereign, and twenty-five knights-companions. On 
the Festival of St. George, in this year, they walked bare-headed in pro¬ 
cession, clad in gowns of russet, and mantles of fine blue woollen cloth, 
with the rest of the habit of the Order, to St. George’s Chapel, where they 
heard mass said by William Edendon, Bishop of Winchester, prelate of 
the order; and after divine service, returned to a sumptuous entertain¬ 
ment. This solemnity concluded with military sports of tilts and tourna¬ 
ments, at which David Bruce, King of Scotland, with other prisoners of 
quality, both Scottish and French, were permitted to assist. 


































SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


5 


battle that he did not gain ; nor undertook an enterprise in which 
he did not succeed. The soldiers loved him to a degree of 
enthusiasm, and always fought under his banner with an assurance 
of victory which no odds could lessen, and no accidents disappoint.* 
It was on the 8th day of May, 1357, that Prince Edward, after 
his victory of Poictiers, entered London, from Sandwich, in Kent, 
(at which place he had landed,) bearing in his captive train John, 
King of France, and the flower of the French and German 
chivalry. He was met in Southwark by the Mayor (John Stody) 
and Aldermen in their formalities, with 1000 citizens on horseback. 
The royal prisoner rode through the streets, in a magnificent habit, 
mounted on a fine white courser, and attended by the Prince of 
Wales, on a little black horse with ordinary trappings. The inhabi-' 
tants vied with each other in displaying plate, tapestry, furniture, and 
arms offensive and defensive, in their shops, windows and balco¬ 
nies. The streets were lined with an infinite concourse of people; 
and the cavalcade lasted from three in the morning till noon. 
When they reached Westminster Hall, where the king of England 
sat upon a throne, in expectation of their coming, he rose up 
when the captive monarch approached, and received him with all 
that courteous civility which might have been expected from a 
Prince of his character. He next embraced his son with great 
tenderness, telling him, that the victory did not please him so 
much as the modesty with which he bore his good fortune. The 
King of France was entertained in the most sumptuous manner, 
and provided with an apartment in Westminster palace, till the 


* It is worthy of remark here, that the Black Prince was the first of the 
royal house of England who adopted the armorial bearings known as those 
of the Prince of Wales. At the battle of Cressy, in 1346, John, King of 
Bohemia, an ally of the King of Prance, having perished, in the heat of 
conflict, by the hand of the Black Prince, the latter denuded the fallen 
monarch of his helmet, in which he wore three ostrich feathers. These, 
which the Bohemian king also wore for the device of his crest, with the 
motto, “Ich Dien” (which, in the German language, signifies “I serve,” 
in token of his capacity as a volunteer) were appropriated to himself by 
the English prince; and the device has been adopted by all succeeding 
Princes of Wales. 




















6 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


palace of the Savoy, in the Strand, could be fitted up for his 
reception/* 1 He remained a prisoner in England for the 
period of three years, when he was liberated upon conclusion of 
a truce between the two countries, and payment of a ransom of 
600,000 crowns of gold.f 

In the year 1371, we find William Walworth, serving the office 
of Sheriff, and in 1374, for the first time, elected to the office 
of Lord Mayor. The year is principally remarkable for a splen¬ 
did tournament in Smithfield, given by King Edward, in honour 
of his mistress Alice Perrers ; at which the chief magistrate, 
and other civic authorities were present.J 

* That antique-looking edifice, with beautiful windows and curious 
little tower, known at the present day as the Savoy church, is the chapel 
of the ancient palace, and the last remnant of its architectural glories. 
The founder of the Savoy was Peter de Savoy, uncle to Eleanor, the queen 
of Henry III. This Peter, coming over to England on a visit to his niece, 
was created Earl of Savoy and Richmond, and solemnly knighted in West¬ 
minster Abbey. The date of 1245 is ascribed to the original erection. 
Erom the Earl of Savoy the palace passed to the Eriars of Mountjoy ; and 
then again returned into the possession of the family, by Eleanor’s pur¬ 
chasing it for her son, Edmund, afterwards Earl of Lancaster. His son, 
Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, was beheaded during the reign of Edward II.: 
the Savoy then became the property of his brother, Henry, who enlarged 
it, and made it so magnificent in 1328, that there was no mansion in the 
realm to be compared with it hi beauty and stateliness. After the decease 
of her only son, the first Duke of Lancaster, in 1351, one of the daughters 
married the famous John of Gaunt, who became, in consequence, the 
possessor of the Savoy. It was his property, therefore, at the period 
alluded to hi the text. 

f Under the date 1364, we find in “ Stowe’s Chronicles” the following 
passage :—“ The 9th day of April, died King John of France, at the Savoy, 
beside Westminster; his corpse was honourably conveyed to St. Denis, in 
France.” It appears from this, and the evidence of cotemporary historians, 
that the French king had returned, a voluntary exile, to London, where he 
was received with open arms by Edward, and took up his final residence 
in the Savoy. 

X This woman had been a domestic of Edward’s late virtuous queen 
Philippa, and married to William de Windsor, at one time Lieutenant of 
Ireland. The king was so infatuated by the personal charms of this idol, 
that he resigned himself wholly to her direction. He was so weak as to 
convey to her the jewels of the queen; she had the presumption to preside 
in the public courts of justice ; and she created and displaced ministers at 
her pleasure. The royal authority grew into contempt; and the whole 
kingdom complained of mismanagement and oppression. 


















SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 7 

In the year 1375, the English lost their darling Prince of 
Wales, who, after having been emaciated by a lingering distemper, 
died at the palace of Westminster, in the forty-sixth year of his 
age, to the unutterable sorrow of his father, and the deep-felt 
regret of the whole nation w r hich had flattered itself with the 
prospect of uninterrupted happiness under the reign of such an 
accomplished sovereign. In the space of two years, King Edward 
himself died, leaving his crown to his grandson, Richard the 
Second, a boy only ten years old. His death took place at Sheen, 
in Surrey, where, since the death of his son, he had sunk into 
unmanly indolence, in the company of his paramour. “ His 
constitution,” says Smollett, “ had been impaired by the 
fatigues of his youth, so that he began to feel the infirmities of 
old age before they approach in the common course of nature ; and 
now he was siezed with a malignant fever, attended with erup¬ 
tions, that soon put a period to his life. When his distemper 
became so violent that no hope of his recovery remained, all his 
attendants forsook him, as a bankrupt no longer able to requite 
their services. The ungrateful Alice, waiting till she saw him in 
the agonies of death, was so inhuman as to strip him of his rings 
and jewels, and leave him without one domestic to close his 
eyes, and do the last offices to his breathless corpse. In this 
deplorable condition, bereft of comfort and assistance, the mighty 
Edward lay expiring, when a priest, not quite so savage as the 
rest of his domestics, approached his bed, and finding him still 
breathing, began to administer some spiritual consolation to his 
soul. Edward had not yet lost all perception: what then must 
have been his reflection, when he found himself thus abandoned 
and forlorn in the last moments of his life ? He was just able to 
express a deep sense of sorrow and contrition for the errors of 
his conduct, and died pronouncing the name of Jesus.” 

On the very day of Edward’s death, Aldermen John Philpot 
and William Walworth, with the principal citizens of London, 
deputed by the Common Council, repaired to Kingston-upon- 
Thames, where the young King then resided, and implored his 
favour and protection to the City of London, expressing their 








8 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


concern, at his being removed so far from the capital, and assuring 
him that they would venture their lives and fortunes for his 
service. They concluded their address with a petition that he 
would take up his residence in the City, and put a stop to the 
prosecutions that had been set on foot by the Duke of Lancaster.* 
Their request was granted, and all differences compromised by 
commissioners sent to London for that purpose; and Richard, 
the very next day, made a magnificent entry into London, 
attended by the Dukes of Lancaster and Brittany, the Archbishop 
of Canterbury, the Bishop of Winchester, the Earls of Marche 
and Warwick, with many other noblemen. 

On the 16th day of July, 1377, the young King was crowned at 
Westminster. On the eve of the coronation Richard rode with 
a pompous cavalcade through the streets of London, from the 
Tower to his palace at Westminster. Next day he walked from 
thence in procession to the Abbey Church at Westminster, where 
he went through the ceremony of unction and coronation. The 
King having on this occasion made a large addition to his council, 
the Duke of Lancaster, who for several years had engrossed the 


* This Duke of Lancaster was the individual known in history as the 
famous John of Gaunt, or Ghent, (from the Flemish town of that name, 
over which the English held superiority.) He was the fourth son of Ed¬ 
ward III., and therefore brother of the Black Prince. He married 
Blanche, daughter and cousin of Henry, Duke of Lancaster (owner of the 
Savoy palace) to which title and property he succeeded. His second wife 
was Constance, eldest daughter of Pedro the Cruel, King of Castile, in 
whose right he assumed the arms and title of that crown; after her death 
he married Catherine of Swinsford, who had already borne to him several 
illegitimate children. At the period mentioned in the text, the Duke of 
Lancaster had all the power of England in his hands, and might, in imita¬ 
tion of several princes who had already ascended the English throne, have 
set aside the lineal heir without much difficulty, had he been really infected 
with that ambition of reigning, which had been fixed as an imputation 
upon his character. This charge he owed to the resentment of the 
monks and clergy, who hated him as the protector of the Reformer 
Wickliffe, who was at this time disseminating his religious doctrines. He 
had, moreover, acquired a great number of enemies by the pride, arro¬ 
gance, and irascibility of his temper; and he was particularly detested by 
the citizens of London, for many instances of contempt which he had 
evinced towards them. 





















SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 9 

whole administration, either disliking his new associates, or think¬ 
ing it prudent to resign an office which might expose him further 
to the envy of his cotemporaries and the odium of the people, 
declined bearing any share in the ministry and retired for a short 
space to his castle of Kenilworth. 

In the first Parliament held after the accession of Richard, to 
concert measures for opposing the progress of the French, we find 
William Walworth and John Philpot, “merchants in London,” 
chosen by the House of Commons as trustees of a large sum of 
money voted for the defence of the kingdom. Having accepted 
the trust to which they were thus elected, our Aldermen con¬ 
sidered that, in order to be allowed properly to perform their 
functions, all the evil councillors of the late King, who still retained 
their position around the throne, should be removed, and their 
posts bestowed upon men of good morals and integrity. Several 
officers were displaced in consequence of this petition; but they 
did not succeed in another, requesting that a Parliament should 
be convened once a-year to regulate the affairs of the nation. Im¬ 
mediately after this session broke up, the Duke of Lancaster, on pre¬ 
tence of taking measures for the defence of the kingdom, demanded 
an order to withdraw the money from the hands of the two trustees; 
and his desire being complied with, he engaged in the service nine 
large ships, 'with which he attacked a fleet of French merchantmen, 
and took fourteen vessels laden with wine. At the same time 
Alderman Philpot, with the concurrence of Walworth, equipped a 
small armament at his own expense; and, sailing in quest of one 
Mercer, a Scottish mariner, who had greatly interrupted the navi¬ 
gation on the northern coasts of England, engaged and took him, 
together with fifteen Spanish ships which, had entered into his 
service. This exploit, though universally applauded by the people, 
gave umbrage to the Government; and Philpot was summoned 
before the Council Board, where he received a reprimand for 
having undertaken such an expedition contrary to law; but, in 
respect of his character, and the service he had done the nation, 
he was questioned no further on the subject. 

In the following year, 1378, we find Walworth taking part in 









10 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


another affair of national importance. Parliament, much to the 
mortification of the City of London, convened on the thirteenth 
day of October, at Gloucester* Richard Lescrop, steward of the 
household, opened the session with a speech representing the 
danger to which the nation was exposed from the enemies that 
surrounded it, and the considerable supplies necessary to rescue 
Calais, Brest, Bordeaux, and Bayonne. The Commons suspecting 
that part of the late subsidies had been embezzled, or converted 
to other uses than those for which they were granted, insisted 
upon knowing in what manner those sums had been expended. 
Lescrop answered in the King’s name, that, although no account 
of subsidies or other grants had ever been made to the Commons, 
William Walworth, in conjunction with some members of the 
Council, should lay before them an account of the receipts and 
disbursements. A copy of the enrolment of last subsidy having 
been granted them, they took exceptions to forty-six thousand 
pounds expended upon fortresses abroad, which they alleged 
ought to have been maintained out of the King’s own revenue 
and patrimonial estate. After these deliberations, the Parliament 
imposed a considerable tax on wool and leather, besides an addi¬ 
tional duty upon salt for one year ; but this was in the next session 
revoked, and in lieu of it, a poll-tax upon all classes, indiscrimi¬ 
nately, throughout the kingdom. 

Alderman Philpot, having been elected to the Mayoralty in 
1578, on his retirement from office in the following year, was 
succeeded by Alderman Hadley. In the subsequent year Hadley 
was in turn succeeded by Walworth, who was now for the second 
time “ Lord Mayor of London.” On the occasion of his inau¬ 
guration a show and pageant of unrivalled splendour took place. 

The poll-tax enacted by Parliament in the preceding year, having 
only begun to be felt during the Mayoralty of Walworth, consi- 

* In early times, Parliaments used to beheld hi many other placesbesides 
London or Westminster; but, from the latter part of the fourteenth cen¬ 
tury, Westminster has been the place at which they have commonly 
assembled: it is reckoned that, since the commencement of the reign of 
Richard II. in 1377, the whole number held elsewhere has been only 
fourteen. 











SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


11 


derable disaffection, as might have been expected, was immediately 
displayed by the populace. The “ Villeins,” or bondsmen, be¬ 
longing to the Church as well as to lay lords, had of late become 
wealthy, and, for some time past had made various efforts to 
recover that freedom to which they thought they had a natural 
title. They purchased exemplifications in the King’s Court, out 
of Doomsday Book, of the manors and towns to which they 
belonged, exempting them from all manner of servitude; and 
would not suffer distress to be taken either by the servants of 
their lords, or the officers of justice ; they engaged in associations 
to stand by one another, and even threatened their landlords with 
death and desolation.* In a recent Parliament, a statute had 
been enacted declaring these exemplifications of no validity, and 
ordering inquiry to be made after such malcontents, that they 
might be tried and brought to condign punishment. This law for 
some time suppressed their disaffection; though the poll-tax, felt as 
it was more keenly by the lower tenants, served to nourish their 
discontents. This disaffection, however, did not arise even amongst 
the poor so much from the imposition of the tax itself, as from the 
manner in which it was levied by the ignorant and brutal indi¬ 
viduals to whom the collection of it was intrusted. The age, at 
which it was ordained that individuals should be included within 
the terms of the enactment, was fifteen years; and the amount 
of the impost, fourpence per head. From this tax females were 
not exempted; the only individuals, indeed, who enjoyed any 
immunity being those who subsisted on charity. In the carrying 
out this enactment, so far did insolence and brutality carry the 
collectors, that, in order to discover Avhether young women were 
of the prescribed age, they proceeded to acts of the grossest 
indelicacy. 

* The state of the lower order of society in England at this period was 
similar to that of the inferior class of subjects (serfs) in Russia at the 
present day. The “villeins,” or bondsmen, did not reside in the house of 
the lord, but they entirely depended on his caprice, and he sold them as he 
did the animals, with the field where they lived, and which they culti¬ 
vated. It was not till the reign of Henry VII., about the close of the fif¬ 
teenth century, that the right of the subject was in the slightest degree 
recognised. 









12 SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 

This rude and scandalous experiment having been attempted 
towards a daughter of Wat Hilliard (denominated Tyler from his 
occupation, which was that of a tile and brick maker) an inhabitant 
of the village of Dartford, in Kent, so aroused the paternal 
feelings of that individual, that seizing a deadly weapon he knocked 
out the brains of the collector on the spot. Nor did his revenge 
end here. Quickly arousing the people to a sense of the wrongs 
which were being used towards them, he called upon them in the 
name of God to free themselves from the tyranny under which 
they had so long groaned. Nor did he appeal in vain. Within 
a few hours the populace ©f the whole surrounding district were 
in arms. Carrying pitchforks and all the iron weapons upon 
which they could lay their hands, they scoured the country in 
every direction, large accessions of adherents meeting them in 
their onward progress, and every hour their appearance becoming 
more terrible. On their arrival at Maidstone, thirty miles from 
the place where the insurrection had at first broken out, the 
insurgents immediately threw open the doors of the public prison, 
and released the inmates. Among these was one John Ball, a 
priest, who had been excommunicated the pale of the Church, and 
been confined in the county gaol for sedition. Possessing a 
factious and daring spirit, this man was no sooner at liberty than 
he assumed the office of chaplain to his deliverers, and as an 
incitement to them to proceed in their present work, exhorted 
them by religious discourse. Taking for his text a proverb then 
in vogue— 

“ When Adam delved, and Eve span , 

Who was then a gentleman ? ” 

he laid it down that all men were equal by nature; and that, as 
children of Adam, no man was inferior to another; that if God 
had predestined any man to slavery, he would have declared who 
should be lords and who servants; and that servitude which is 
acquired by unjust power, is confirmed by as unjust laws. He 
would, therefore, advise them to go to the King, and demand 
liberty; and if they could not obtain it by fair means, to have 
recourse to that which would inevitably effect their purpose. 
























SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 13 

Animated by this harangue, “To arms! To arms!” was the 
general shout; and a council of war being held, Wat Tyler was 
by unanimous consent chosen leader. Brutus of old, after the 
endurance of much personal wrong, did not rouse himself to 
avenge injured female innocence, and rid Borne of its oppressors, 
with more seemingly virtuous resolution, than did Wat Tyler when 
he assumed the command of his disaffected countrymen on the plains 
of Kent. He had, he said, seen the rights of men trampled on and 
treated with contempt—he had groaned under taxation, the pro¬ 
ceeds of which, instead of contributing to the maintenance of good 
order and government in the realm, went to the support of patri¬ 
cian riot and debauchery—he had beheld many evils perpetrated, 
and many wrongs inflicted,—but till brutal violence had been 
offered to his own daughter, the spirit within his bosom had 
not been roused. But it was then aroused; and the man 
who, under more humane circumstances, might have been a happy 
and virtuous subject, was converted into a daring and malignant 
rebel. 

Vested with the dignity of leader, Wat forthwith administered 
the following oath to his adherents:—“ To be true to King Richard 
and the Commons of England; never to receive a king whose 
name was John, (in allusion to John Duke of Lancaster,) to 
persuade their neighbours to join in the common cause ; and never 
to submit to the payment of a larger tax than a fifteenth part.” 

Leaving Maidstone, the insurgents marched to Blackheath, 
where they received a large accession to their numbers from the 
western parts of Essex. The whole force by this time amounted 
to about a hundred thousand men, composed chiefly of country 
labourers and the poorer portion of the community. Up to this 
stage of the proceedings, according to Tyler himself, the main 
objects of him and his followers were the rectifying of public 
abuse, and the abolition of evil laws and customs, especially that 
of “villeinage” (by which they as human beings were regarded as 
mere part and parcel of the soil), but what with the vile exhorta¬ 
tions of Ball, the priest (who told them that till the whole of the 
nobility and all lawyers were destroyed, their efforts would be to 









14 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


no purpose), and the desperate character of many who now began 
to join them, we must henceforth regard them rather as a lawless 
mob, than as a people endeavouring to rid themselves of tyranny 
and oppression. 

Encamped upon Blackheath, the rebels now presented an 
army, both in numbers and spirit, well calculated to inspire awe 
in the hearts of those against whom their intentions were directed. 
Foreseeing the impending danger, and the critical position of 
affairs, the King despatched messengers to Blackheath to know 
the reason of the commotion. These messengers were desired in 
return to acquaint the King that they were assembled to confer 
with him about matters of the greatest importance, and therefore 
wished that he would come to them without delay. This peremp¬ 
tory request was debated in council. Some were of opinion that 
the presence of the King would be the only means of quelling the 
disturbance; while others, (among whom were Simon Sudbury, 
Archbishop of Canterbury, and Lord Chancellor, and Sir Robert 
Hales, prior of the church of St. John of Jerusalem, at Clerken- 
well, and Lord High Treasurer,) most strenuously opposed such a 
proposition, as totally inconsistent with the safety of the royal 
person; the more especially as he was at this time only fifteen years 
of age. The latter advice having at length been taken, word was 
conveyed to the insurgents to that effect. Inflamed to madness 
by this peremptory refusal of their request, the rebels forthwith 
devoted the whole Cabinet Council to destruction. Leaving Black¬ 
heath, they pursued their march to London. They entered 
Southwark on the 10th of June, and breaking open the King’s 
Bench and Marshalsea Prisons, released the prisoners, who imme¬ 
diately joined them ; and searching out the houses of lawyers, 
jurors, and other obnoxious parties, they instantly razed them to 
the ground. Separating his army into two divisions, Tyler 
despatched that portion of it composed of Essex men to Lambeth, 
where they burnt the Archiepiscopal Palace, with its costly furni¬ 
ture, together with all the books, registry, and writings relating 
to Chancery affairs:—heading the other division himself, he de¬ 
stroyed a large number of brothels, situated along the banks of the 


























































SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


15 


river, which were chiefly kept by Flemish women, and maintained 
by the nobles and gentry of the City. 

In this dreadful posture of affairs, Walworth caused the gate of 
the bridge to be shut and fortified against the rebels ; but after 
repeated threats on the part of the latter to destroy the Borough 
of Southwark, and seeing that the whole of the lower orders 
of the people flocked to the insurgent standard, our civic func¬ 
tionary capitulated, and admitted them on the 13th day of June 
which was that of Corpus Christi. Being now joined by large 
numbers of the City rabble, they hastened westward to the 
“ Savoy,” in the Strand, the palace of the Duke of Lancaster. 
This, the most magnificent edifice in the kingdom, they set on 
fire; and in order that no wreck or vestige of its existence might 
remain, it was commanded that none should dare to appropriate 
to his own use anything belonging to the palace under pain of 
death. This general order having been in one instance disobeyed, 
the offender, who had secured to himself a piece of plate, was 
immediately committed to the flames; and general proclamation 
was made that they came not to enrich themselves by plunder, 
but to do justice to an injured people by taking revenge upon 
their cruel and inveterate foes. It is handed down by tradition, 
that thirty-two of the insurgents, during the affray having found 
their way into the Duke’s cellar, and forgetting where they were, 
so long and mirthfully caroused, that the rafters having fallen in, 
they perished in the flames. The mob did not leave the scene of 
their revenge till the palace, with all its plate, jewels and furniture, 
had been completely consumed. 

The next object of their fury was the Temple, which they like¬ 
wise destroyed by fire, together with all the records of Chancery, 
and books, and papers belonging to the students. The several 
other Inns of Court shared a similar fate. 

It being now necessary, for the more complete accomplishment 
of their designs, and in order that the work of devastation might be 
going on in several places at the same time, to separate their 
force, they accordingly divided themselves into three bodies. 
One division repaired to Sir Robert Hales s priory of St. John of 























16 SIK WILLIAM WALWOETH. 

Jerusalem, at Clerkenwell.* This having burnt, they next 
betook themselves to Highbury Manor, also possessed by Sir 
Robert Hales, which they likewise sacked. The second divi¬ 
sion encamped on Tower Hill, and notwithstanding that the 
fortress was garrisoned by six hundred armed men, and as 
many archers, they effected an entrance, and committed great 
havoc. It is said that the King, who at this time resided within 
the Tower, being commanded by the third division of the insur¬ 
gents, consisting of the Essex men, who had encamped them¬ 
selves at Mile End, to come immediately, unarmed and unattended, 
to a conference with them, thought it prudent to comply with 
their injunctions; and that in his absence those on the Hill en¬ 
tered into the Tower without opposition. Whether or not, how¬ 
ever, the insurgents made their way so easily into the fortress, 
cannot be determined; yet, certain it is that they did effect an 
entrance, and dragging therefrom Simon Sudbury, the Arch¬ 
bishop of Canterbury, and Sir Robert Hales, prior of St. John’s, 
beheaded them on the Hill.f The Archbishop in his last moments 
is said to have used many entreaties in order to dissuade them 

* This priory, in which resided the Knights of the half-military, half 
religious order of St. John of Jerusalem, was founded about the year 1100, 
by Jordan Briset, a baron of the kingdom, and Muriel, his wife. This was 
the period of the first crusade, when Godfrey of Bouillon had driven the 
infidels from the Holy Land, and was elected the first Christian King of 
Jerusalem. But it was some forty years later that the servants of the 
Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem became a military order of monks, the 
first body of men united by religious vows, who melded the temporal 
sword against the enemies of the faith. The Crusade fanaticism having 
ceased, the knights of the Order resident in London are said to have 
addicted themselves to all manner of tyranny and licensiousness, and on 
this account incurred the hatred of the common people, resulting in the 
maimer described in the text. The gate, known as St. John’s Gate, is the 
only existing remain of this significant priory. 

f Archbishop Sudbury was a man who made no ordinary figure in the 
historical events of the fourteenth century. It was before him and several 
delegates from the Pope, in his palace of Lambeth, that the most illustrious 
of our early reformers, WicklifFe, was summoned, in 1378, to defend his 
tenets. On this occasion, the London citizens and the mob forced them¬ 
selves into the archbishop’s chapel, and spoke in the Reformer’s behalf, 
to the great terror of the delegates. The latter, however, would un¬ 
doubtedly have passed a severe sentence on the “heretic,” had they not 


































SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


17 


from the shedding of innocent blood, but in vain. His body, 
babarously mangled, was left exposed to view at the place of 
execution, for the space of twenty-four hours. His head was 
next day placed upon a pole, and fixed on London Bridge.* 1 

All kinds of licentiousness, according to Stowe, were perpe¬ 
trated by the rebels in the Tower. “ Many of them,” says he, 
“ went into the King’s privy chamber, and played the wantons, 
in sitting, lying, and sporting them upon the King’s bed.” The 
Princess of Wales, the King’s mother, was at the time in the 
Tower, and placed completely at their mercy. She was allowed, 
to depart, however, at the price of a few rude kisses. Still the 
horror of the scene completely overpowered her, and she was 
taken away by her ladies in a boat senseless, and rowed across to 
the other side of the Thames, and placed for refuge in a house in 
Carter’s Lane. 

During the progress of the executions of Sudbury and Hales, 
the King was treating with the insurgents at Mile End. The 

been completely confounded by a message from the King’s mother 
forbidding them to proceed to extremities. Wickliffe delivered in writing 
an elaborate statement of his views, but which was so little satisfactory 
to the delegates, that they commanded him to repeat no more such “ ob¬ 
noxious propositions,” either in the schools or his sermons. The practice 
of burning heretics did not come into vogue till the beginning of the 
fifteenth century. 

* At various periods of its history, the collection of traitor’s heads at 
London bridge would have made a respectable craniological museum. 
The first of the London bridge traitors of whom there is any record, was 
the Scottish patriot and hero, William Wallace, whose resistance to a 
foreign yoke Edward I. could never subdue, till he had made his true 
heart be plucked from his bosom, and his head fixed up aloft here, to be 
gazed at in comparative tranquility by many who would have stood short 
space to scan his living visage wherever they might have encountered it. 
Amongst the other extraordinary heads, so to speak, which were elevated 
at different times subsequently, may be mentioned, besides those of Hales 
and Sudbury, those of the aged Earl of Northumberland, father of the 
gallant Hotspur Percy, in 1408, Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, and his 
friend Sir Thomas More, in 1535. Heads continued to be exposed here, 
principally those of seminary priests, executed for violation of the statute 
prohibiting their entry into the kingdom, throughout the reigns of Eliza¬ 
beth and James I., and down even to the breaking out of the civil war in 
that of Charles I. After the Restoration, too, the heads of some of the 
regicides were set up on London bridge. 

c 





















18 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


proposals made to him there, and which may be regarded as an 
exposition of the grievances under which the disaffected laboured, 
were—“First: That all men should,from thenceforth, be free from 
servitude or bondage, so that there should be no longer any 
bondsmen or villeins. Second: That there should be a general 
pardon to all men, of all manner of actions and insurrections, 
treasons, felonies, transgressions and extortions. Third : That all 
men should from thenceforward be enfranchised to buy and sell 
in every county, city, borough, fair, market, and other place, 
within the realm of England. And fourth: That no acre of land, 
held in bondage or service, should be held for more than four- 
pence ; and, if it had been held for less in former times, it should 
not thereafter be enhanced.” 

The King, while these propositions were being made to him, 
listened with patience; when seeing from their determined reso¬ 
lution, that it would be impolitic to oppose them, he yielded his 
consent. He was then permitted to return to the City, and this 
portion of the rebels immediately dispersed. 

In the meantime, Wat Tyler and his band were committing the 
most awful outrages throughout London and Westminster. Mur¬ 
der was added to rapine, and, on the 15th of June, 1381, perhaps 
more people fell by the hand of ruthless violence than can be 
well calculated. Many of the most distinguished citizens were 
slaughtered, and those who were spared were only such as pro¬ 
fessed a compulsory adherence to the dictates of the rebels. 
Among those who perished on that memorable day was Mr. 
Richard Lyons, a well known jeweller and goldsmith, and pre¬ 
viously one of the Sheriffs of the City* But the fury of the 

* This individual had been peculiarly obnoxious to the lower orders at 
this time for various acts of oppression. By the Parliament of 1375, he 
v as fined in twenty thousand marks, and sentenced to be confined in the 
Maishalsea Prison, until he should pay the amount, for having, in the 
office which he held, as farmer of the King’s customs, been guilty of 
usury, as well as of smuggling wool and different sorts of merchandise, to 
other ports besides Calais, through which, being held in superiority by the 
English, it w as required that all goods exported from England to foreign 
countries should pass. Amongst other persons fined at the same time 
for similar offences, were the King’s mistress, Alice Perrcrs, and Lord 
Latimer, King’s chamberlain. 










SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 19 

populace was chiefly directed against foreign merchants, particu¬ 
larly the Flemish, who were regarded as the monopolists of the 
national trade. Driven by the cruelties of the insurgents,these unfor¬ 
tunate creatures betook themselves for refuge to any church into 
which they could find ingress, imagining that perhaps the mur¬ 
derers would not pollute the house of God: but in vain. Dragged 
from their place of shelter, if they could not pronounce, says 
Stowe, the words “ bread and cheese,” without a foreign accent, 
which in that of Flanders would be “brot and cawse ,” they were 
slaughtered in the streets without further ceremony.^ 

Among other acts of the rebels was the breaking open of the 
Fleet and Newgate Prisons and releasing the prisoners. They 
also made proclamation for the decapitation of all lawyers and 
persons connected with the Exchequer, and even all such as were 
capable of writing a letter. 

After the King had returned to the City, and reported to his 
mother, and those of his council who had escaped the sword of 
the rebels, the result of his conference at Mile End, it was 
resolved, in their present critical position, to try the effect of a 
similar concession towards those commanded by the ringleader. 

Wat Tyler with his men were at this moment posted in West 
Smithfield, but although three proposals of capitulation, each more 
conceding than the preceding, were submitted to him, he rejected 
them all with disdain. Emboldened by his success, or convinced 

* At this period the foreign trade of England was almost entirely in the 
hands of aliens, and, in consequence, there were large numbers of foreign 
merchants in London. They are described in an Act passed in 1377, as 
not only trading in the goods imported by themselves from abroad, but 
also as buying in the ports where they were established, and elsewhere, 
at their free will, the various commodities which were the produce of this 
realm, and selling them again at their pleasure within the country as 
freely as any of the King’s subjects. Thames Street, in those days, must 
have been thronged with foreigners from all the countries which had inter¬ 
course with England; the Hanse Towns, Venice, Genoa, and other parts. 
Galley Quay, the name of which is still preserved, was the place where 
the galleys of Italy and other places discharged their cargoes ; the mer¬ 
chants of Bordeaux (traders in wine) had their, storehouses in the Vintry 
—hence the name. 




20 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


that royal concessions were only made to be broken, he at once 
and disdainfully rejected all overtures at pacification. 

Still ignorant of Tyler’s ultimate designs, and anxious to try 
every means to put a stop to further bloodshed, the King sent 
Sir John Newton, one of his knights, to invite him to a conference 
with him in Smithfield, where they might discuss that article in 
the treaty about which Wat was so solicitous, viz., that he should 
have a commission to behead all lawyers, and all others who were 
either learned in the law, or held any connection therewith. Sir 
John, having executed his master’s commission, upon taking his 
leave of the insurgent advised him to be at the spot appointed as 
soon as possible; to which the latter replied, “ If you are in so 
much haste, go tell your master I will come when I think 
proper.” Notwithstanding, however, this remark, Wat slowly 
repaired to the place at the head of his army; and on catching a 
glimpse of the King, setting spurs to his steed, he pushed boldly 
from his companions, and halted not till he arrived by the side of 
the monarch. 

“ Sire, King ; seest thou all yonder people ?” were the terms in 
which he first accosted Ifichard. 

“Yea, truly,” quoth the King, “wherefore say’st thou so?” 

“ Because” said Wat, “ they be all at my command, and have 
sworn to me truth and fealty, to do all that I would have them.” 

“ In good sooth,” replied the monarch. “ I believe it well.” 

“ Then,” said the insurgent, “ believest thou, King, that these 
people, and as many more as be in London at my command, will 
depart from thee thus, without having thy letters?” 

“ No,” was the reply of Richard, “ ye shall have them, they be 
ordained for you, and shall be delivered to every one of them.” 

At these words, Wat observing that Sir John Newton, who 
rode on horseback carrying the King’s sword, halted not at a 
respectful distance from his majesty, observed, “ That it would 
better become him to be on foot in his master’s presence.” To this 
remark the knight made no reply further than that he thought 
he did no harm; which having nettled Wat somewhat, the 
insurgent drew his dagger menacingly, and called him “ traitor.” 




















SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


21 


“ I am no traitor,” said Sir John, as he drew his dagger. 

“ me that sword,” demanded Wat. 

“ No,” replied the knight; “ it is the King’s sword, of which 
thou art not worthy; neither durst thou ask it of me had we 
been by ourselves.” 

“ Traitor! I repeat, give me that sword, or by Jesu I’ll have 
thy life before I eat;” and the rebel, in an agony of passion, 
was running upon the knight, when Richard, to prevent con¬ 
sequences, caused Sir John to dismount. 

Wat being thus pacified, the King requested him to state on 
what terms he would disband his followers, and put an end to 
the insurrection. To this the rebel replied, that besides the general 
manumission which the King proposed to grant to bondsmen, he 
was determined to have a commission to put to death all lawyers ; 
he insisted also that all the ancient laws of the kingdom should 
be abolished, and that all “ forests, parks, and warrens ” should 
be made free and common to all; so that the poor as well as the 
rich might have the liberty to hunt, fish, and fowl, in any place 
they thought proper. 

While the King retired to a short distance to deliberate with 
his attendants on these proposals, Wat was stalking up and down 
with all the dignity of conscious authority. Ever and anon, as he 
would cast his eye over to the place where his enemies were 
standing, his countenance would be lit up with a grin of defiance. 

“ The behaviour of that vile and impudent traitor,” said one of 
those in conclave with the monarch, who was watching the move¬ 
ments of the rebel; “ the behaviour of that vile and impudent 
traitor is as intolerable as it is dangerous. I would have thee to 
dispatch him.” 

“And so should we,” were the words with which the rest of 
the attendants all at once backed the proposal. 

A moment's deliberation, and the doom of Wat was sealed. 

The King, nodding to William Walworth, the Mayor, who 
stood by, said, “ This is within thy jurisdiction, Walworth— 
execute thou justice on this rebel.”— 

No sooner commanded than done. The Mayor, wheeling round 

























22 SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 

his horse, rode instantly to the side of Wat, who was somewhat 
off his guard, and uplifting his sword brought it down with such 
tremendous force upon his head, that the rebel fell senseless at his 
feet. John Sandwich and a few others, who followed the Mayor, 
completed the work of destruction by running him through the 
body. 

The leader thus fallen, a shout was now raised among the 
rebels, “ Our captain is murdered. Let us revenge his death,” 
they cried, and drawing their bows, they prepared to rush furiously 
upon their foes. 

The King at this juncture foreseeing the danger he and his 
followers were exposed to, with a prudence and boldness superior 
to his age, rode bravely up to the van of the insurgents. 

“ What! my friends,” said he, addressing them, “ will you kill 
your King ? Be not troubled at the loss of your leader—I will be 
your leader, and grant what you desire.” 

These words seemed to have a magical effect upon the 
rioters, for, changing their resolution, they marched under his 
conduct into St. George’s Fields. In the meantime Walworth 
and Alderman Philpot hastened to the City, and with an amazing 
celerity raised and armed a thousand citizens. These they put 
under the command of Sir Robert Knolles, a brave and ex¬ 
perienced officer, who immediately led them to his majesty’s 
assistance.* 4 Observing this accession to the force of their enemies, 
the rebels, struck with a panic, no longer hesitated about what they 
should do. Throwing down their arms they implored the King 
for mercy, which, though contrary to the advice of his council, 
Richard not only granted, but presented them with a charter of 
manumission similar to that which he had granted to those of 
Essex. 

Thus ended the “ insurrection of Wat Tyler,” perhaps the 
most dangerous and remarkable outbreak which ever occurred in 

* Sir Robert Knolles was the most distinguished warrior of his age. 
He had shared in all the military glories of the reign of Edward III., and 
died in Kent, twenty-five years subsequent to the above date, in 1406, 
after having lived in private many years. 














SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


23 


any country. It affords a warning to all rulers, against long 
tampering with the affections of a people by the iron hand of 
oppression. The popular spirit once aroused, the offending 
instrument must be withdrawn : loyalty may be brought back 
to its allegiance by gentle remonstrance, but will only be lashed 
into opposition by violence and invective. 

A fresh body of mutineers from Hertfordshire were in full 
march to join Tyler, when they received news of his death, and 
the dispersion of their confederates. Nevertheless, they still 
kept together, and extorted letters of manumission from the 
monastery of St. Alban’s, and other lords to whom they owed 
vassalage, some of whom they murdered. The peasants of Suf¬ 
folk and Norfolk also, thinking they had as good a title to liberty 
as those of Kent and Essex, took to their arms, and struck off 
the head of Sir John Cavendish, Lord Chief Justice of England, 
and committed other dreadful outrages. They never reached 
London, however, for before they had set out on their journey 
to join Tyler, they were defeated, and many of them put to the 
sword by an armed force under the command of Henry Spencer, 
the Bishop of Norwich. 

Notwithstanding these repeated overthrows, the insurgents of 
Essex had the presumption to send deputies to the King for a 
confirmation of their charter : but by this time Richard was in a 
condition to treat with them according to his own choice. Im¬ 
mediately after the dispersion of Tyler’s adherents, he had 
assembled his military tenants, and summoned his faithful sub¬ 
jects to take arms for the security of his person; and, in three 
days, he mustered forty thousand men on Blackheath. On the 
30th day of June, he published a proclamation, requiring all 
tenants to do their accustomed services; and, sending a detach¬ 
ment of troops into the heart of Kent, to maintain the peace of 
that county, marched in person against the rebels of Essex, who, 
being defeated in two successive engagements at Billericay and 
Sudbury, submitted, and sued for mercy. During this expe¬ 
dition, the King, being at Chelmsford, issued letters patent, 
revoking the charter he had granted to the insurgents of Kent 





















24 


SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


and Essex, alleging that they had forfeited all title to such 
indulgence by their subsequent rebellion. 

Amongst the insurgents taken on this occasion were the notorious 
Jack Straw, the leader of the Essex rebels, and Ball, the 
priest, who, being arrested and carried before Walworth, as 
Mayor, were condemned to be executed. Before their death 
Straw uttered the following confession as to the designs meditated 
by the rebels from the first period of their rising:— 

“ That when they assembled on Blackheath, and sent a message 
to the King desiring him to come to them, they had resolved to 
have killed all his attendants, and carried him along with them 
wheresoever they went, in order that the populace might have 
greater encouragement to join their standard ; and that when, by 
help of the King’s presence, sufficient numbers had been gathered 
from the several counties in the country, they were to have mur¬ 
dered all those who would not be favourable to their designs :— 
First: The nobility and gentry, and then the King, with all the 
clergy, regular and secular, with the exception only of the 
mendicant friars, who Avere considered sufficient for the perform¬ 
ance of Divine Worship throughout the kingdom. These objects 
completed, they Avere to enact suchlaAvs, as they judged proper for 
popular government. Wat Tyler was to haA r e been made king of 
Kent, and each of the other principal ringleaders appointed to the 
different counties respectively; each county forming a distinct 
kingdom. And on the very evening of that day on which Wat 
Avas killed, the Avhole rabble of London Avas to rise, sack and burn 
the City.” 

The above, StraAv reiterated several times at the place of execu¬ 
tion, and called God to Avitness to its truth. 

Peace being noAv restored, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s head 
Avas taken doAvn from the Bridge; and the heads of Wat Tyler, 
Jack StraAv, and some others, placed in its stead. 

The King, as a reAvard for this great national deliverance, Avhich 
he attributed to the prompt measures of the City authorities, con¬ 
ferred the honour of knighthood upon William Wahvorth, the 



































SIR WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


25 


Mayor, and Aldermen John Philpot, Nicholas Brembre and 
Robert Laund. His majesty also granted to the first a fee farm of 
one hundred pounds jier annum ; and to the other three, farms of 
forty pounds per annum each. 

In the Hall of Fishmongers there stands within a niche, a 
full-sized statue of W alworth, carved in wood, and painted in 
pioper colours. The gallant knight is represented in the 
diess of his time, his right hand grasping a real dagger, re¬ 
ported to be the identical weapon with which he struck Wat 
Tyler from his horse in Smithfield. Below the niche are these 
lines:— 


“Brave Walworth, Knight, Lord Mayor, yat slew 
Rebellious Tyler in his alarmes, 

The King, therefore, did give in lieu, 

The dagger to the Cytyes Arms.” 

It is generally considered that the dagger which appears in 
the armorial bearings of the City of London, was introduced as a 
token of remembrance of the great assistance rendered on this 
occasion to the King by the City, and the overthrow of the leader 
of the insurgents by the Mayor. Several historians, however, 
dispute the dagger owing its origin to this circumstance, from 
the fact of its being found on the armorial bearings of the City, 
prior to this date. 

During the remainder of the term of Sir William Walworth’s 
Mayoralty, he had the honour of conducting to London, Anne, 
Princess of Bohemia and sister to the Emperor Winceslaus, on 
the occasion of her marriage with King Richard. She landed at 
Dover, and was met at Blackheath by the Mayor and Aldermen, 
and many of the principal citizens, richly escorted. In the City 
she was magnificently entertained, whence she proceeded in 
triumph to Westminster. 

Walworth, resided within the parish of St. Michael's, Crooked 
Lane; and in the year 1380, by a licence from Richard II. he 






































26 Sill WILLIAM WALWORTH. 

founded a college in connection with the rectory church adjoining 
the market of Eastcheap. This church had been built in the 
year 1317, by John Lovekin, the then Mayor of the City, also a 
resident of the parish. 

Sir William Walworth enlarged Lovekin’s church with a choir 
and side aisles, and added eight different chantries to it; and by 
a further addition to its annual revenue, converted it into a 
college, consisting of a master and nine priests to celebrate Divine 
Worship, “ for the good state of the King, himself, and Margaret 
his wife, whilst living, and their souls when dead, together 
with those of the said chantries, and the souls of all benefactors 
and faithful deceased.’” 

It is worthy of mention that this edifice was immediately con¬ 
tiguous to the Boar’s Head Tavern, the ancient abode of “ mine 
hostess Dame Quickly,”—the region of wit, wine, and wassail,—the 
resort of the madcap Prince of Wales, and his boon companions, 
old Jack Falstaff, Poins, Pistol, Bardolph, Peto, Gadshill, and 
Nym. The earliest notice of this place occurs in the testament of 
William Warden, who, in the reign of Richard the Second, gave 
his “ tenement called the Boars Head , Eastcheap, to a college of 
priests or chaplains, founded by Sir William Walworth, Lord 
Mayor, in Crooked Lane.” Whether at that time it was a tavern, 
or a cook’s residence, it does not appear; but very early in the 
next reign, if any confidence can be reposed in the locality of 
Shakspeare’s scenes, it became the resort of old Jack Falstaff 
and Prince Hal; but subsequently it was converted into a 
residence for the priests, to whose college it had been devised. 
Goldsmith, in his “ Reverie at the Boar’s Head Tavern,” for¬ 
getting the destruction of the former building in the Great Fire, 
speaks of the tavern existing in his time, as the identical place 
which Falstaff frequented. 

Sir William died in the year 1381, soon after the expiration 

of his term of office, and was buried in the parish church of St. 
Michael’s. 

The Company of Fishmongers still preserve his funeral pall, 
which is curiously embroidered with gold. They have likewise 












Silt WILLIAM WALWORTH. 


27 


an interesting plan of the splendid Show which was exhibited at 
the time of his inauguration as Mayor, in 1380.* 


* A tolerable idea of the appearance and manners of the metropolis 
prior to and about the close of the fourteenth century, may be gathered 
from the works of several old authors. London is thus described by the 
old chronicler Fitzstephen who died in 1191 :—“ The wall of the city is 
high and great, continued with seven gates, which are made double, and 
on the north distinguished with turrets by spaces : likewise on the south, 
London hath been enclosed by walls and towers, but the large river of 
Thames, well stored with fish, and in which the tide ebbs and flows, by 
continuance of time, hath washed, worn away, and cast down these walls.” 
There is another passage in Fitzstephen, which takes us, as do most of his 
descriptions, into the every day life of the ancient Londoners, their schools, 
their feasting, and their sports :—“ In Easter holidays they fight battles 
on the water. A shield is hanged on a pole, fixed in the midst of the 
stream; a boat is prepared without oars, to be carried by violence of the 
w r ater, and in the forepart thereof standeth a young man, ready to give 
charge upon the shield with his lance. If so be, he break his lance against 
the shield, and doth not fall, he is thought to have performed a worthy 
deed. If so be, without breaking his lance, he runneth strongly against 
the shield, down he falleth into the water, for the boat is violently forced 
with the tide; but on each side of the shield ride two boats, furnished with 
two young men, which receive him that falleth as soon as they may. 
Upon the bridge, wharfs, and houses by the river side, stand great num¬ 
bers to see and laugh thereat.” This sport, which may still be seen 
amongst the watermen of the Seine, and of the Rhine, was the delight of 
the bold youth of London in the days of Henry II. In the reign of 
Richard II., the period treated of in the text, the features of the city 
might be thus described:—A portion of London bridge was moveable, 
which enabled vessels of burden to pass up the river to unload at Queen- 
hithe, and other wharfs. Stairs (called bridges) and watergates studded 
the shores of both cities. Palaces arose, such as the Savoy, where the 
principal nobles kept almost regal state. The Courts of Law were fixed 
at Westminster, and thither the citizens and strangers from the country, 
daily resorted, preferring the easy highway of the Thames to the almost 
impassable road that led from Westminster to the village of Charing, and 
onward to London. 































SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 

(LORD MAYOR.) 


Sir Richard Whittington, a contemporary of Sir William Wal¬ 
worth, was not less celebrated than that worthy in his capacities 
of citizen and chief magistrate of London. If the name of Wal¬ 
worth is associated, to his immortal renown, with the slaying of 
the rebellious Tyler in Smithfield, that of the other is equally 

famous in connection with 

A catte ye most puissant 
In killynge rattes and mice,— 

and which has supplied the theme of one of the most playful 
nursery tales to be found in any language. 

Richard Whittington, three times Lord Mayor of London, is 
said to have been born in the village of Taunton-Dean, in Somer¬ 
setshire, somewhere about the year 1330. According to the 
pleasant story just alluded to, and which, with all the exaggera¬ 
tions of its gilded legends, is supposed to be not altogether the 
offspring of fiction, his parentage was humble : his parents dying 
while he was yet young, the orphan was befriended by an old 
woman in the village, who, though poor, continued to act towards 
him the part of the father and mother whom he had lost. The 
death of this benefactress having taken place while he was yet a 
lad, Dick, having accidentally heard that the streets of London 
were paved with gold and silver, set out on foot for the metro¬ 
polis, and, after a long and tedious journey, arrived at the place 
of his destination— 

Give me a pin to stick in my thumb, 

And I’ll away to London town— 

London town is a bonny place 

All covered over with gold and lace :— 

—so said the old ballad. 

Regarded as a whole, the popular story of Richard Whittington 
and his Cat, may be considered as finely inculcating upon the 


































SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


29 


youthful mind the principles of integrity and perseverance. It 
was written at a period when the apprentices of London, over¬ 
stepping the controul of their masters, not unfrequently by their 
riotous and dissipated conduct, made the streets of the metropolis 
the scene of riot and confusion. The tale, as it at present stands, 
belongs to the age of Elizabeth, though there can be little doubt 
but that its burden was familiarly current from the time of the 
individual whose praises it so finely celebrates. It was admirably 
adapted for the purpose for which it seems to have been intended ; 
and as a romance, curiously contrived to convey a moral and 
lasting impression, is superior to many productions of a later age. 

“ Dick walked about the streets till he grew so hungry and 
tired, and so disappointed at finding nothing but dirt instead of 
gold, that he sat down on a door-step and fairly cried himself to 
sleep. He was all night in the streets, and when morning came, 
was glad to beg a few halfpence to keep him from starving, 
While thus employed, a kind-hearted man asked him if he was 
willing to work ; he was overjoyed at the offer, and was taken 
to some hay-fields and worked and lived merrily while the employ¬ 
ment lasted. At the close of the haymaking season, poor Dick 
was as bad off as ever, and being nearly starved again, he sat 
himself down on the step of the door of a large house in Cornhill, 
which happened to belong to a rich merchant named Fitzwarren. 
Late at night, while poor Dick was crying fit to break his heart, 
Mr. Fitzwarren came home, and seeing a ragged little boy at the 
door, asked him what was the matter : poor Dick sobbed out his 
misfortunes, and the merchant asked him if he was willing to earn 
his living. Dick told him he would work with all his heart, but 
that he knew nobody and was most faint for want of food. Upon 
hearing this the kind merchant ordered him to be taken into the 
house, and a good supper given to him, and to be kept to do any 
dirty work required by the cook.” 

The story then proceeds to show how that there are no tyrants 
like your petty ones ; and how that menials are, for the most 
part, to those below them, greater disciplinarians than their 
masters. It turns upon an incident of gallantry, evincing the 






30 


SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


capriciousness of the taste of woman, and demonstrating that to 
gain her hand it is not necessary in all cases to have recourse to 
deceit and coxcombry. 

“ Dick Whittington could now have lived happily enough if it 
had not been for the ill-temper of the cook, who was finding 
fault and scolding him from morning till night; besides, she 
was so fond of basting that she would very often baste poor Dick 
with the ladle. At last her ill-usage of him was told to Miss 
Alice, Mr. Fitzwarren’s daughter, who told the cook she ought to 
be ashamed of using the poor boy so, and said she would have 
her turned away if she did not treat him better for the future. 
The footman, an elderly, kind-hearted man, was very good to 
the poor boy, and sometimes gave him a halfpenny to buy ginger¬ 
bread. One morning Miss Alice was going out for a walk, and 
the footman happening to be out of the way, Dick (who had got 
a good suit of clothes from his kind master) was told to walk 
behind her. As they went along, Miss Alice took out her purse 
to give a poor woman some money, and in so doing dropped it. 
Dick quickly picked it up and gave it her, making a respectful 
bow. One day Miss’s parrot escaped and flew into a high tree : 
none of the servants would venture after it, but Dick threw off 
his coat, and climbing the tree soon brought the favourite to his 
delighted young mistress, who liked him ever after. 

“ Dick’s flock bed stood in a garret, which was so overrun with 
rats and mice that he could seldom get a good night’s rest on 
account of them. One day a visitor gave him a penny for clean¬ 
ing his shoes, and next day Dick saw a girl with a cat under her 
arm ; he offered his penny for it, which was gladly accepted, and 
Dick’s cat soon drove away all the rats and mice. Dick’s master 
having a ship about to sail, offered his servants a chance of good 
luck by sending out anything they chose to make a profit on: they 
accordingly all sent something except poor Dick, who declared 
he possessed nothing in the world but his cat; this, then, his 
master insisted upon his sending, so the jioor fellow was soon 
as much tormented with mice and rats as ever. The ill-tempered 
cook began to use him more cruelly than ever, always making 













SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


31 


game of him for sending his cat to sea. At last poor Dick could 
bear this ill-usage no longer; and so, packing up his bits of things, 
set out very early in the morning of Allhallow’s day, which is the 
first of November; he walked as far as Holloway, and there sat 
down upon a stone, and began to think what he should do. 
While he was thus meditating, Bow bells began to ring, and he 
fancied they said to him,— 

‘ Turn again Whittington, 

Lord Mayor of London.’ 

‘ Lord Mayor of London ! ’ said he to himself, ‘ why I would put 
up with anything to be Lord Mayor of London. Well, I will go 
back,’ and he did so, where, luckily his absence had not been 
noticed. 

“ The ship in due time arrived on the coast of Barbary, and the 
cargo was soon sold to a good account: the captain sent presents 
to the king of the country, who was much pleased, and invited 
the captain and his chief mate to the palace. Here they were 
placed on rich sofas, with the king and queen at the head of 
the table, which was covered with a grand entertainment; but 
they had scarcely sat down, when a vast number of rats and mice 
rushed in, and began to devour all the eatables they could find. 
The captain was astonished, and asked the king if he was usually 
annoyed in that manner. ‘Oh, yes!’ said his Majesty, ‘ and I 
would give half the riches of my kingdom to get rid of the 
vermin.’ The captain immediately thought of poor Dick’s cat, 
and told the king he had a creature on board that would destroy 
them all. The king was overjoyed at the news, and puss was 
immediately sent for, and did ample justice to the captain’s recom¬ 
mendation by quickly destroying numbers of the unwelcome 
intruders. The king and queen were so pleased with the actions 
of puss that they offered a considerable quantity of gold for her, 
which was gladly accepted on account of poor Dick ; he soon 
after took leave of the king and queen, and set sail for London, 
where, after a happy voyage, he arrived safe. On the next 
morning the captain waited on Mr. Fitzwarren, accompanied by 
the mate, and several sailors carrying great lumps of gold, which 





32 SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 

had been paid for the cargo, and also Dick's rich present for the 
cat: at this sight the merchant was much pleased ; the cargo had 
produced much more than he expected, and the adventure of the 
cat and the quantity of gold sent for it, delighted the good mer¬ 
chant, and he immediately sent for Dick, who was busy scouring 
some kettles. When he came, Mr. Fitzwarrcn ordered a chair for 
him and bade him sit down, and told him of his good fortune, and 
wished him a long life to enjoy it. Poor Dick could scarcely 
believe all this, but he was soon convinced by the kind-hearted 
merchant. Dick (now Mr. Whittington) made a very handsome 
present to the captain, another to the mate, and to each of 
the sailors; he rewarded his good friend the footman, and 
gave something to each of his fellow servants, not forgetting even 
the ill-natured cook. When Mr. Whittington was dressed as 
became his altered fortunes, Miss Alice thought she had never 
seen a young man she liked so well, and he also ventured to speak 
his mind to her, so that no young people could be more happy 
than they. Mr. Fitzwarren soon perceived their love for each 
other, and he highly approved of it, so that after a while he gave 
his consent to their union. Mr. Whittington now applied him¬ 
self to business, and had great success; he sent out ships to the 
coast of Barbary, which returned well laden with gold, and in a 
few years he became one of the richest merchants in all the world. 
He lived in great splendour, and was elected Lord Mayor of 
London, and the procession was more splendid than ever was 
seen before or since, and the feast contained such profusion of 
delicacies, with wines of delicious flavour, and conducted with 
such decorum that the guests only regretted that it did not last 
their lifetimes. 

“ Mr. Fitzwarren lived to see his son-in-law become the greatest 
man of the age, and died happy, much beloved and regretted. 
Whittington and Alice were extremely fond of each other, and in 
a few years were surrounded by their little ones; he was several 
times Lord Mayor, and the last time he entertained King Henry 
V., in a truly magnificent style, and the King was so pleased with 
his loyalty and goodness of heart, that he knighted him. 




















SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 33 

“ Many happy years Whittington lived, and with his wife and 
children was universally beloved; no poor person was sent from 
his door without relief, and his public charity was munificent. 
Old age came upon him and still he was happy. Alice first left 
this world for a better, and Sir Richard Whittington did not long 
survive, but lived to see his children following his own steps, and 
died leaving behind him a pattern of virtue and piety, shewing 
the success of exertion with perseverance under difficulties.” 

Now, the reader may just receive as gospel as much of the 
story respecting Whittington and his Cat, as his own good sense 
and sagacity will warrant. There are historians of the present 
day, before whom— 

All charms fly 

At the mere touch of their philosophy. 

Such men would clip an angel’s wing, 

Conquer all mysteries by rule and line; 

Empty the haunted air, the gnomed mine, 

Unweave the rainbow, 

and there are readers, too, of somewhat the same character. Yet, 
albeit there have been no cats of the present day whose deeds 
have been so extraordinary as those performed by the puss of the 
once famous Lord Mayor of London, and although, indeed, it 
might be difficult to attribute to a member of the feline species 
the full amount of merit accorded in the olden nursery tale, we 
are not for this reason to reject the existence of its master as a 
fable unworthy the attention of either the Lords Mayors, Aider- 
men, or citizens of modern times. That there was a Richard 
Whittington, a member of the Mercer’s Company, chosen three 
times at different periods, to fill the civic chair of the greatest 
city in the world—a man possessed of enormous wealth, acquired 
by the exertion of his own talents; who added to the power with 
which wealth and station always endow their possessor, the prin¬ 
ciple of benevolence to the poor in a remarkable degree—whose 
pageants eclipsed in the pomp of their ceremonial, all that had 
ever been witnessed before on the eventful day which ushers the 
civic monarch into office; and the splendour and sumptuousness 
of whose entertainments in the Guildhall were such, that the 

c 







34 


SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


King, with his courtiers and nobles felt ashamed of their own 
poverty, when they beheld the costly profusion of a merchant 
citizen—is a well authenticated record in the annals of London. 

The first particular mention of Whittington in connection with 
public affairs, is in the year 1377, on occasion of a collision 
between the city and the Parliament. Although at peace for the 
time being with France, Spain, and Scotland, the terms 
between England and these countries were not sufficiently 
friendly to allay, in the minds of the administration, all chance of 
invasion. With the view, therefore, of providing against such a 
contingency, Parliament granted a considerable subsidy, by way 
of poll-tax, which was even extended to all the Clergy except 
the mendicant Friars : but as the necessities of the court would 
not admit of a delay, until this aid could be collected, the 
ministers demanded a boon of four thousand pounds from the city 
of London, which was refused. This refusal was resented in such 
a manner by the Duke of Lancaster and the ministry, that Adam 
Staple, the Lord Mayor, was removed from office, and Richard 
Whittington appointed as his successor. The Londoners, by no 
means favourites at any time with the Duke, were still less so 
when they saw the power taken out of their hands so coolly; and 
although Whittington was in every way worthy to fill the situation 
in which he had been placed, the mayoralty of Staple had not as 
yet expired. Nor were their rising feelings in the least controlled 
when they heard it stated that the Duke had advised the King to 
abolish the existing constitution of the city altogether, and reduce 
it under the authority of the Lord Marshal. This individual, at 
that time Lord Percy, by his behaviour, seemed also to confirm 
the report; for he ordered a person to be arrested and imprisoned 
in his own house, though it stood within the liberties of London. 
This outrage, added to their former resentment, incensed the 
populace to such a degree of fury, that a riot ensued. They 
plundered and destroyed the house of the Lord Marshal, and 
would have sacrificed him to their revenge, had they found him 
in his own dwelling. Luckily for him, he happened to dine that 
day with the Duke of Lancaster, at the house of a foreign 


































SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


35 


merchant in a different part of the city. Disappointed in this 
part of their expectations, the populace proceeded to the palace 
of the Savoy, belonging to the regent, which they immediately 
stripped of all its rich furniture, after having murdered a priest, 
who ventured to blame their proceedings. Their intention was 
to have relieved Sir Peter de la Mere, who had been imprisoned 
for having spoken in the late Parliament with great freedom of 
the infamous practices of Alice Perrers, and also William of 
Wickham, Bishop of Winchester, who had been incarcerated on 
equally frivolous pretences; but, finding neither, they hung up 
the arms of the Duke reversed; and would have committed many 
more terrible outrages, had not they been pacified by the Bishop 
of London, whose person they revered.*^ Lancaster and Percy 
hastened to Kennington, to advise with the Princess of Wales, 
the widow of the Black Prince; who, being very popular in the 
city, sent thither four knights of her household to expostulate 
with the rioters, and represent the iniquity and ill-consequence of 
their proceedings. They immediately desisted, in obedience to 
her commands, but demanded the knights to tell the Duke of 
Lancaster they expected the Bishop of Winchester and Sir Peter 
de la Mere should be tried according to the laws of their country. 
The magistracy then sent a deputation to assure King Edward 
that they had used their utmost endeavours to prevent this dis¬ 
turbance. The King received them graciously, and admitted of 
their excuse; but the duke was so incensed at the presumption 
of the populace, and the injury he had sustained in his effects, 
that he had not only exacted a submission from the chief returns, 
but also made a clean sweep off of the Mayor and Aldermen, and 
filled their places with his own creatures. 

* Lord Pitzwalter, a standard-bearer of the city, joined the citizens on 
this occasion, and instigated them to the means of self defence which they 
threatened to adopt in so summary a manner. To reverse the escutcheon 
of the Duke of Lancaster was the most severe demonstration of displeasure 
which the populace could evince, as it denoted him what they considered 
In'm to be—a traitor. The “ Savoy” only survived its fate for the space of 
four years, when it was completely destroyed by the rebels under Wat 
Tyler. 




36 SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 

It does not appear that Whittington acted in the capacity of 
chief magistrate beyond a very short period in the present year, 
if, indeed, he did at all; for his name is first found in the list of 
Lords Mayors under the year 1397, exactly twenty years after¬ 
wards. In the latter year, as a further proof of the respect in 
which he was held by his fellow-citizens, he was chosen to repre¬ 
sent them in Parliament. 

On the accession of the subject of our notice to the civic chair, 
great hopes were entertained by the citizens that he would con¬ 
tinue to sustain the lustre with which its possession had already 
begun to be invested. Nor were they disappointed, for no Lord 
Mayor before ever served the office with more zeal, and satisfaction 
to all parties. 

For several years previously, while fulfilling the duties of his 
station as Alderman of the Ward of Vintry, he had been recom¬ 
mended to the notice of his fellow-citizens, by the active part 
which he had taken in every popular measure. In 1389, Smith- 
field, which had so lately been the scene of rebel tumult, was 
honoured by a martial tournament on the Sunday after Michael¬ 
mas, and the subject of our notice, with his fellow-magistrates, 
superintended the festivities. The event had been proclaimed in 
all the principal courts of Europe, and many foreigners of dis¬ 
tinguished rank flocked to the scene of the mimic battle-sports. 
On the day appointed, a pompous cavalcade of sixty ladies set 
out from the Tower, all richly dressed, and mounted on fine 
horses. “ Those who came in the king’s party,” says Fabian, 
“had their armour and apparel garnished with white harts that 
had crowns of gold about their necks. Twenty-four, thus 
apparelled, led the horses of the same number of ladies by chains 
of gold. The jousts continued four days, in the presence of the 
king, the queen, and the whole court, his majesty himself giving 
proofs of his skill and dexterity. During the whole time, open 
house was kept at the king’s expense, at the Bishop of London’s 
Palace, for the entertainment of all persons of distinction.” 

In 1392, two years after the event just described, we find 
Whittington, in concert with most of the principal merchants of 




















SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


87 


London, engaged in a contest with the Crown, which had well 
nigh accomplished the destruction of the liberties of the city:— 
A journeyman baker, belonging to the city, having quarrelled 
with one of the servants of the Bishop of Salisbury, in St. Dun- 
stan’s Church, Fleet Street, an affray took place, in which the 
populace espoused the part of the citizen. The King, however, 
still smarting from the refusal of the Corporation to advance him 
a loan of an extraordinary amount which he had demanded but 
a few months before, made the affair in St. Dunstan’s the plea 
for venting the full extent of his displeasure. 

Bichard, having conferred with his council, came to a reso¬ 
lution “ that it was not only expedient, but very requisite, that 
the insolent pride of those presumptuous Londoners should be 
speedily repressedaccordingly, the Mayor and Sheriffs were 
degraded from their office, the government of the city delivered 
to a custos; the citizens fined three thousand marks; their 
liberties seized; seventeen persons appointed Aldermen during 
the royal pleasure ; and the King and the nobility not only with¬ 
drew to York, but removed with them from Westminster the 
Courts of Justice. Submission, however, and payment of the 
fine, occasioned the restoration of nearly all the city liberties; 
and the King, returning to London, was met at Sheen, or Rich¬ 
mond Heath, by four hundred citizens on horseback, dressed in 
a rich uniform, with the Recorder at their head, who made a 
speech, in which he humbly begged pardon for their past offences, 
and earnestly entreated his majesty to honour the Chamber of 
London with his presence, to which he consenting, they attended 
him to St. George’s Church, in Southwark, where he was 
received by a solemn procession of the Clergy, and five hundred 
boys in surplices, with the Bishop of London at their head. At 
London Bridge he was presented with a fine horse, adorned with 
trappings of gold brocade, and his queen with a fine pad, accou¬ 
tered with very noble furniture. The city never was more richly 
embellished than on this occasion, for the inhabitants of every 
rank strove to outvie each other in honour of the reconciliation 
with their sovereign; the streets were lined with the city com- 







38 


SIB BICHAED WHITTINGTON. 


panies in their formalities; the houses hung with rich silks and 
tapestry; and the conduits, all the while, ran with a variety of 
wines. At the Standard, in Cheapside, a magnificent pageant 
was erected, on which was placed a boy in white, to represent an 
angel, who, upon the king’s approach, presented him with wine 
in a gold cup, and placed on his head a crown of gold, adorned 
with a variety of pearls and precious stones, as well as another 
on the head of the queen. At St. Paul’s the King made an offer¬ 
ing, and was thence conducted, with the same solemnity, by the 
Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Sheriffs, to the Palace at West¬ 
minster, where, the next day, they made his majesty a present 
of two silver basons gilt, with a thousand nobles of gold in each; 
curious pictures of the Trinity, valued at eight hundred pounds; 
and several other valuable presents as well to him as to the 
queen. But after all they were obliged to pay an additional fine 
of ten thousand pounds before he would restore them the right 
of choosing their own magistrates—an action which not only 
destroyed their affection for the prince, who oppressed them with 
such rigor and injustice, but probably occasioned them at another 
period to receive the Duke of Lancaster with open gates. 

Queen Anne having died, in 1396 the king, and his new royal 
consort, Isabella, were met by the citizens upon their coming 
from France, and were conducted with extraordinary magnificence 
through the city. But, two years after, the Londoners fell once 
more under the royal displeasure. Petitioning to have their 
taxes taken off, and against entering into a treaty with the French 
King about the delivering up of Calais, Richard was so exasperated 
against them that he obliged many of the richest of the citizens 
to sign and seal blank papers sent them by the ministry, who 
afterwards filled them up at pleasure with such sums as were 
likely to drain them effectually. The interest and intercession 
alone, we are told, of Bishop Robert Braybroke, and of Roger 
Walden, Archbishop of Canterbury, saved them from other marks 
of the king’s displeasure. 

The year following the expiration of Whittington’s first mayor¬ 
alty, was pregnant with great events to London and England 


















SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 39 

generally. John, Duke of Lancaster, died, and was succeeded in 
his title and estate by his son the Duke of Hereford, against 
whom the King cherished a deadly enmity. By the death of his 
uncle, King Richard, thinking himself freed from every restraint, 
he plunged into all manner of effeminate debauchery, and profligate 
profusion. The northern counties became now ruined by the in¬ 
cursions of the Scots, whom Richard had not spirit to repel: and the 
native Irish made great progress in wresting their recent posses¬ 
sions from the hands of the English. No care was taken to protect 
the trade of the nation—the government was despised abroad and 
insulted at home; and universal dissatisfaction prevailed against 
the King and his ministry. The people naturally turned their 
eyes upon the Duke of Lancaster, as the only person from whom 
they could hope redress. He was a Prince distinguished for his 
great talents, and, unlike his father, beloved by the English in 
general, and stimulated by injuries against Richard, whose 
person and society they now despised. The King, having gone 
over to Ireland to check a rebellion amongst the people of that 
country, the Duke of Lancaster, (who at that time resided in 
France,) sent over some trusty emissaries to make his friends 
acquainted with his intention, that they might be prepared to 
receive him at his landing. He next set out himself with the 
Archbishop of Canterbury and a retinue of about four-score 
persons. He at length landed at Ravenspur, in Yorkshire, where 
he was joined by the Lords Willoughby, De Roos, D’Arcy, 
and Beaumont. His cause was next espoused by the Duke of 
Northumberland, the Earl of Westmoreland, and others ; and at 
the head of sixty thousand men he marched to London, where he 
was received by the Mayor (Thomas Knolles), Aldermen and 
citizens, with all the marks of triumph and exultation. In a 
few days Richard, having returned from Ireland, was taken 
prisoner in Flint Castle, Cheshire, by the Duke of Lancaster, who 
had proceeded thither with his army. With the royal captive in 
his train the Duke again resumed his march to the metropolis. 
At some distance from London, he was met by the Recorder, 
and a number of knights and esquires, who demanded, in the 




40 SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 

name of the Commons of London, that he would behead Richard, 
and all those taken in his service; but Lancaster rejected 
the proposal, telling them that he would leave the delin¬ 
quents to the judgment of a free Parliament. The Duke was 
received in the City by the Mayor, Aldermen, and Common 
Councilmen in their robes, and the guild companies in their 
liveries ; and he made his entrance amid the acclamations of the 
people, who cried aloud, “ Long live the good Duke of Lan¬ 
caster, our deliverer.’’ Richard was conveyed to the Tower, but 
the Duke repaired to St. Paul’s Cathedral, where he performed 
his devotions at the high altar, and then kneeled at his father’s 
tomb. He went to lodge in the house of the Knights of St. John 
of Jerusalem, at Clerkenwell, where he resided till the meeting of 
Parliament, at Westminster, on the last day of September. 
Nothing demonstrates the misconduct of the King, and the 
oppression that prevailed in his reign, so clearly as the universal 
defection of the people in favour of the Duke of Lancaster, who, 
in seven and forty days, made himself master of all England, 
without the least opposition. The King was accordingly deposed, 
and, on the meeting of the Legislature, Henry IV. ascended the 
throne. Richard was in a little time removed to the Castle of 
Ledes, in Kent, and from thence to Pontefract, in Yorkshire, 
which was the last stage of his earthly pilgrimage.* 

* Froissart gives us an account of the interview between Richard and 
Henry on the occasion of the former yielding his sceptre to the latter. 
After the Act of Deposition passed by Parliament, Richard desired a con¬ 
ference with his aspiring rival and the Archbishop of Canterbury. The 
conference accordingly took place in the Council Chamber of the “ White 
Tower,” on the 29th day of September, 1399, being the Feast of St. Michael 
the Archangel. There were present a deputation from each house of Par¬ 
liament, including the most distinguished persons in the kingdom. 
Richard came forth clad in his kingly robes, the sceptre in his hand, the 
crown upon his head, and said aloud, “ I have been King of England, 
Duke of Aquitaine, and Lord of Ireland, about twenty-one years, which 
seigniory, royalty, sceptre, crown, and heritage, I clearly resign here to my 
cousin Henry of Lancaster, and I desire him here in this open presence, 
in entering of the same profession, to take this sceptre“ and so,” says 
Froissart, “he delivered it to the Duke, who took it.” Such is the his¬ 
torian’s account; it may be worth while to look at the poet’s also, and 












SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


41 


Some years after, when the kingdom was threatened with inva¬ 
sion by France and Scotland, Richard Whittington was one of 
those merchants who surrendered a tenth of their property to 
the state: and, for his patriotic conduct on this occasion, which 
found the usurper deserted by the nobles of the land, he was 
created a knight. Some time afterwards he was sent, in com¬ 
pany with the Archbishop of York, as a commissioner to the 
Earl of Northumberland, then in arms against the government, 
to endeavour to conciliate him; and, though he failed in that 
object, Henry was so pleased with the Archbishop’s report of his 
integrity and prudence, that, as some say, he offered to raise him 
to the peerage. Sir Richard, however, declined the honour, 
though, in the following year (1406), he suffered himself to be a 
second time elected Lord Mayor of London. During this mayor¬ 
alty, which some erroneously call his third, the Earl of Northum¬ 
berland made such head, that Henry was obliged to take the 
field; and Sir Richard Whittington subscribed one thousand 
pounds towards equipping his troops. London was desolated to 

learn something more of what was passing beneath these outward forms 
and ceremonies:— 

“ I give this heavy weight from off my head, 

And this unwieldy sceptre from my hand, 

The pride of kingly sway from out my heart; 

With mine own tears I wash away my balm, 

With mine own hands I give away my crown, 

With mine own tongue deny my sacred state, 

With mine own breath release all duteous oaths : 

All pomp and majesty I do forswear : 

My manors, rents, revenues, I forego: 

My acts, decrees, and statutes I deny: 

God pardon all oaths that are broke to me ! 

God keep all oaths unbroke are made to thee ! 

Make me that nothing have with nothing grieved ; 

And thou with all pleas’d that hast all achiev’d! 

Long may’st thou live, in Richard’s seat to sit, 

And soon lie Richard in an earthen pit! 

God save King Henry, unking’d Richard says, 

And send him many years of sunshine days ! ” 

Well might the unhappy monarch ask in addition— 

“ What more remains ?” 






42 


SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


a fearful extent this year by the occurrence of a dreadful plague. 
No less than twenty thousand of the inhabitants were swept off; 
and, in consequence, corn became so cheap that wheat sold at the 
small rate of three shillings and fourpence per quarter. 

In the year 1410, Sir Richard applied for a licence to build a 
church, together with a college and alms-house, on a piece of 
ground which the city had given him for that purpose. In the 
following year, having obtained the requisite licence, he built and 
endowed the church and college of St. Spirit and St. Mary. The 
foundation of the college was for “ a master, five fellows, master of 
arts, clerks, and conductsand an alms-house, which he after¬ 
wards built, was attached. This latter building was called God’s- 
House, or hospital, and was endowed for thirteen poor citizens. 
The principal, who was to be a teacher of the others, was to have 
eighteen-pence per week; and each of the remaining twelve was 
to have two-pence per diem. The house was to be supplied with 
fuel from the foundation with a hutch, or corn chest of three 
decks ; a common seal, and furniture. The inmates were bound 
to pray “ for the good estate of Richard "Whittington, and Alice 
his wife, their founders; for the souls of Hugh Fitzwarren, and 
Dame his wife ; of King Richard II., and Thomas of Woodstock ; 
Duke of Gloucester; special lords and promoters of the said 
Whittington; and for Anne and Eleanor, the wives of the said 
King and Duke. Moreover, for the good weal and estate of our 
Sovereign Lord King Henry IV., and the Lord Archbishop of 
Canterbury (Thomas Chichely) that now be, and for the conser¬ 
vators and benefactors of the said house, while they live ; also 
for their souls and ours, when they and we be passed out of the 
world; and generally for them to whom the said Sir Richard 
Whittington and Dame Alice were beholden in anywise, while 
they live, and for all Christen soules.” 

We find Whittington in the same year taking a very impor¬ 
tant part in the general improvement of the city. Up till this 
period the Guildhall had been but a mean edifice, situated in 
. Aldermanbury, and far too limited for transacting the business 
of the Coiporation, which was increasing daily. MTiittin cp ton, 















SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 43 

almost solely at his own expense, raised a new erection, which 
was formed to facilitate the transaction of civic affairs. Princi¬ 
pally by his public spirit, also, another great improvement was 
effected, in the building of the Stocks Market , on the site now 
occupied by the Mansion House. 

Two years after this period, and while still actively employed 
in the performance of his public duties, the subject of our notice 
is found attending a great Council, held at the White Friars , 
where, among other things, preparations were considered for the 
King’s journey to the Holy Land. This expedition, however, 
was not fated to be fulfilled, for, immediately after the Feast of 
Christmas, while making his prayers at King Edward’s Shrine, 
at Westminster, the monarch was seized with sickness, and, 
being removed to the Jerusalem Chamber, in the Abbot’s lodg¬ 
ings, died on the 20th of March following. 

Henry the Fifth, son of the late King, was on terms of equal 
friendship with the citizens of London, and under his paternal 
auspices the city advanced in wealth and character. Moorgate 
was first built about this time, and another remarkable improve¬ 
ment was effected, namely, the illumination of the streets at 
night by means of lanthorns. One can scarcely repress surprise 
that so useful and necessary a regulation had not been made 
much earlier, considering the number and wealth of the inhabi¬ 
tants, and the brooks and puddles which still ran through every 
quarter of the city. This great advance in civic reform took 
place in 1416, during the mayoralty of Sir Henry Barton. 

But the great feature of Henry’s reign was his renowned 
victory over the French at Agincourt, and perhaps there was no 
circumstance connected with this great achievement, which 
afforded to the monarch a better proof of the estimation in which 
he was held by his subjects, than his reception by the citizens of 
London on his triumphant return. The Mayor, Aldermen, and 
Sheriffs, in their scarlet robes, attended by three hundred prin¬ 
cipal citizens, mounted on stately horses, richly accoutred, met 
his Majesty at Blackheath. The Clergy, too, in magnificent 
copes, and preceded by crosses and censers, burning frankin- 






44 


SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


cence, met him at “ St. Thomas of Watering, beyond Kent Street.” 
The city was decorated in the most sumptuous manner, and the 
conduits ran with various sorts of wines. The day following, the 
Mayor, Aldermen, and citizens repaired to Westminster, and 
presented his Majesty with a thousand pounds in gold, in two 
basons of the same metal and value. 

About this period Sir Richard also erected and founded a mag¬ 
nificent library at Grey Friars, and a foundation in Christ’s Hos¬ 
pital. He pulled down and rebuilt Newgate, which was des¬ 
troyed afterwards by the great fire of London. 

In the year 1419 Sir Richard was again, for the third time, 
elected Lord Mayor of London. 

It was during this mayoralty that he entertained Henry of 
Agincourt and his Bride, Catherine of France. Never before, 
perhaps, did a merchant display such magnificence as was then 
exhibited in the Guildhall. The tables groaned beneath the 
weight of gold and silver that was heaped upon them ; precious 
stones were ranged about to reflect the rays of the chandeliers; 
and the fires, which the season 'of the year rendered necessary, 
were fed with the richest of spices. The choicest fish, the most 
exquisite birds, the most delicate meats, and the most rare con¬ 
fections, served on the precious metals, were spread before the 
guests, whose senses were all alike regaled. The most skilful 
musicians, with a choir of beautiful females, performed a concert 
the while ; and a conduit ran rich wine to their music. “ Surely,” 
cried the amazed king, “ never had prince such a subject; never 
was liberality such as this displayed by a subject to his sovereign.” 
“ Even the fires,” cried the queen, “ are filled with perfumes.” 
“ If your highness,” said Sir Richard, “ inhibit me not, I will 
make these fires still more grateful.” As he ceased speaking, 
and the king nodding acquiescence, he drew forth a packet of 
bonds, and, advancing to the fire, resumed, “ Thus do I acquit 
your highness of a debt of sixty thousand pounds;” and he 
tossed the bonds into the fire. The king stood mute with 
astonishment; the queen was motionless ; and the dames of the 
court, unable to repress their admiration, burst into a loud plaudit. 















SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 


45 


This large amount of money had been borrowed by the King 
to pay his army engaged in the prosecution of the war against 
France. The King’s bond for ten thousand marks due to the 
Company of Mercers; another of fifteen thousand marks due to 
the Chamber of London; a third for two thousand marks due 
to the Company of Grocers; another for three thousand marks 
due to several other companies ; and divers others, in all amount¬ 
ing to the sum already named, had been taken in by Whittington 
and discharged. 

The year 1419 is also remarkable for the foundation of Leaden- 
hall Market. Sir Thomas Eyre, a merchant of the city, compassion¬ 
ating the distress to which the poor very frequently were driven 
to by the scarcity of corn, built Leadenhall at his own expense, 
and gave it to the city to be employed as a public granary. He 
likewise founded a chapel on the east side, where, in the time of 
Edward IV., a fraternity of the Trinity was founded, consisting 
of sixty priests, besides other brethren and sisters, with an obli¬ 
gation for part of them to perform service every market day, for 
the benefit of those who came to market.* 

Whittington died in the year 1420, and was buried in St. 
Michael’s, Vintry. 

The will of Whittington, which, is still in the possession of 
the Mercer’s Company, is headed by “ a curious illumination, 
representing,” says Pennant, “ Whittington lying on his death¬ 
bed —a very lean, consumed, meagre body ; and his three execu¬ 
tors, with a priest and divers others, standing by his bed-side.” 
The document opens, “ To all true people of Cryste that shall 
se or here the things conteyned in these present letters, John 
Co ventre, Jenkin Carpenter, and William Grove, exekiters of 
the worthie and notabil merchaunt Richard Whittington, late 
citizen and mercer of the citie of London, and sometime mayre 
of the said citie, sendinge greetyng in our Lord God everlast- 
ynge.” It concludes thus:—“ In wytnes we have put to our 
seeles, gyven at London the xxj daie of Decembre, in the yere 
of our Lord God MCCCCXXIV.” 

* At the dissolution of the religious foundation referred to, Leadenhall 























46 SIR RICHARD WHITTINGTON. 

“ Go littel boke, go littel tragedie, 

Thee lowly submytting to al correction 
Of them being maisters now of the mercerie— 

Olney, Felding, Boleyn, and Burton ;— 

Hertilie theym beseetching, with humbil salutation, 

Thee to accept, and thus to take in glee, 

For ever to be a servant within our commonaltie.” 

The citizens, particularly the merchants, long kept the anni¬ 
versary of Whittington’s death with particular respect. Among 
the returns of Chantries, &c. in the second year of Edward VI. 
is the following from the Mercers’ company :— 

“ Paide yerely for the obitte of Master Whittington for spicest 
brede, with the spices and whyte bunes and butter, with other 
thinges thereto apperteyninge, xlis. viijc?. For perres, apples, 
pyskettes, chese, ale, and wyne, and the butteler’s fee, with other 
thinges, xxviijs. viije?. For waxe, and ringing of bells, ijs. To 
the poor men for to offer, xiije?. To the Lord Maior of London, 
vjs. viijc?. To the thre wardens of the Mercers, iij7f. and to the 
rent wardens, xls. To the clarke of the Mercer, vjs. viijc?. And 

as for priestes and clerkes, we never paid none. 

ix&‘. vjs. ij7.” 

was alienated for different purposes ; it was at one time a market both for 
wool and foreign commodities in general; afterwards it was converted 
into an armoury, and was often used as the resort of the military musters 
of the citizens. It is now the principal market in the city for articles of 
domestic consumption. 


















SIR JOHN CROSBY, 

(ALDERMAN.) 


SIR JOHN CROSBY was perhaps the most prominent of our 
civic functionaries who bore a hand in the struggles between the 
Houses of York and Lancaster. He is supposed to have been 
born about the year 1420, though nothing can be directly ascer¬ 
tained either regarding his parentage, or the place of his birth. 
The old dramatist, Hey wood, introduces the subject of our 
notice into his play of Edward IV., and attempts to invest 
his story with almost as much of the marvellous as belongs to 
that of Whittington. He makes him say that he was found near 
a cross, and hence his name, and that he was subsequently 
brought up in the Hospital of London. This was a very current 
report among the vulgar in Crosby’s time, and for generations 
subsequently ; though recent investigations have shown the 
family to have been opulent for at least a century before.* 
With reference to this reputed origin of his name, Stowe 
observes, “ I hold it to be a fable saide of him, to be named 
Crosbie of being found by a cross.” Crosby belonged to the 
Company of Grocers, and was at one period of his life Warden of 
its affairs. He was elected an Alderman in the year 1465, and 
was one of the Sheriffs of the City in the year 1471; and, about 
the same period, held the mayoralty of the Staple of Calais. 

He represented the City in Parliament in the year 1461, being 
the same year in which Edward IV. ascended the throne. 

Throughout his whole career, he appears to have distinguished 
himself among the party attached to the House of York, and 
was one of those whom Edward knighted on his approach to 
London, after the landing at Ravenspur in 1471. With respect 

* In the Gentleman’s Magazine for May, 1839, is an abstract of the 
subsidy roll of the Mayor and Sheriffs of London in the 13th of Henry IV. 
in which John Crosby is rated at 6s. 8 d. in the pound on lands of the value 
of 31/. 1 s. 2d. within the city. This, doubtless, was the father of Crosby. 





48 


SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


to this circumstance, the anonymous author of the Chronicles of 
London thus writes:—“ This yere kyng Edward landed in the 
North with fewe people, and came to London on Sher Thursday, 
and toke his journey furth ageyne on Easter even.” His colleague 
in the Shrievalty seems to have been honoured with knighthood 
at the same period. 

On the 4th of the month of May following was fought the 
battle of Tewkesbury, which ended in the destruction of the 
Lancastrian forces, the death of Prince Edward, and the capture 
of Queen Margaret. On the 12th, Falconbridge, a follower of 
Warwick, attacked the city of London, and finding that the 
completeness of the late victory had so settled the mind of the 
country, that to attempt the release of Henry VI. from the Tower 
would be now a useless project, he contented himself with the 
hope of satisfying his followers with the plunder of the city ; 
possessing himself of Southwark, he crossed the river at St. 
Katharine’s, and attacked the city bftth by the way of Bishops- 
gate and Aldgate, whilst another party stormed London Bridge, 
and fired the houses on it, and others to the number of three 
hundred. Within the Tower, at this time, resided, besides the 
captive monarch, Henry VI., the Queen and the family of Edward 
IV. placed in the royal apartments of the fortress for safety, 
during the absence of the King in the West of England. The 
dramatist in the play already alluded to, makes Crosby in this 
posture of affairs address his fellow citizens :— 

“ Stick to your City, as good men should do; 

Think, that in Richard’s time e’en such a rebel 
Was then by Walworth, the Lord Mayor of London, 

Stabbed dead in Smithfield. 

Then show yourselves as it befits the time,— 

Dare stab a rebel were he made of brass.” 

And again— 

“ Let never rebels put true subjects down ; 

Come when they will, their welcome shall be such 
As they had better kept them farther off.” 

In the parley with Falconbridge, who summons the city to 
surrender, Crosby is made to reply— 





















SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


49 


“Nay then, proud rebel, pause, and hear me speak : 

There’s not the poorest and meanest citizen 
That is a faithful subject to the King, 

But, in despite of thy rebellious rout, 

Shall walk to Bow, a small wand in his hand, 

Although thou be encamped at Mile End Green : 

And not the proudest rebel of you all, 

Shall dare to touch him for his damned soul.” 

The citizens, under Crosby and the Aldermen, were sufficient 
to repulse the rebels, and the King coming to the metropolis on 
the 21st of the month, was met by the City authorities between 
Shoreditch and Islington, where he knighted Crosby and others, 
who had been most instrumental to the successful resistance which 
had been made ; and Heywood subsequently introduces Crosby 
clad in his robes, and puts into his mouth the following soliloquy, 
in reference to the circumstances :— 

“ Ay, marry, Crosby, this befits thee well, 

But some will marvel, that with scarlet gown, 

I wear a gilded rapier by my side : 

Why, let them know ; I was knighted in the field, 

For my good service to my Lord the King; 

And therefore I may wear it lawfully, 

In court or city, or at royal banquet.”* 


* The dramatist here makes Crosby personate the Lord Mayor though 
he never occupied the civic chair. One of Crosby’s colleagues in the ma¬ 
gistracy 7 ' was also one of the bravest at this time in his defence of the city 
against the rebels. This was Alderman Robert Basset, who, while one of 
the detachments of the insurgents was endeavouring to force its way 
through Aldgate into the city, repulsed it with so much valour, that, 
being now deserted by his adherents, Falconbridge escaped on board his 
ships at Blackwall and got out to sea. lie was afterwards taken and 
executed at Southampton. Stow, in his account of this rebellion, and 
other authors tell us, that many houses on London bridge were burned 
down on the occasion. The only great commotion which had previously 
disturbed the city since the death of "Wat Tyler, was that caused by the 
rebels under Jack Cade, on the evening of Thursday the 2d of July, 1430. 
On this occasion, the commonalty of London opened the bridge gates to 
the insurgent leader, who, as he entered at the head of his men, cut the 
ropes of the drawbridge asunder with his sword. For a particular account 
of Cade’s Rebellion, the reader is referred to the year 1430, in the “Chron¬ 
icles of the Mayoralty r and Shrievalty,” at the end of the volume. 


E 








50 


SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


In the following year, 1472, a most delicate commission was 
entrusted to Sir John Crosby, in common with Sir John Scott, 
marshall of Calais, Watcliffe, the King’s secretary, Dr. John 
Russell, archdeacon of Berkshire, and other eminent persons. 
Their chief ostensible object was to arrange various matters, then 
in abeyance, between the Duke of Burgundy and the King of 
England, and, we presume, to form a treaty of alliance against 
France, which Edward then meditated attacking. From thence 
they passed to the court of the Duke of Brittany, where, besides 
concluding a similar treaty, they were, says Stowe, “to have 
gotten there the two earls of Pembroke and of Richmond. Had 
they succeeded in this object, how different might have been the 
destiny of England. Soon after the defeat of the Lancastrians at 
the battle of Tewkesbury, the Earl of Pembroke had fled with 
his young charge to seek refuge in France. A storm drove his 
vessel on the coast of Brittany, and the two nobles were detained 
by Francis, the reigning Duke. Edward now claimed them as 
enemies and fugitive traitors, but in vain ; he could get no other 
assurance than that they should never be allowed to disturb his 
government. This was far from satisfactory; hence the secret 
mission given to Sir John Crosby and his companions, who, by 
profession of friendship for the exiles, succeeded at last in per¬ 
suading both them and the Duke of the propriety of returning to 
England. The future conqueror of Bosworth field was already 
at St. Malo, on the point of embarkation, when Landois, the 
minister of the Duke, suddenly arrived, and prevented his sailing 
on various pretexts till Richmond took the alarm, and fled from 
the agents of the man w r ho had probably the same fate in store 
for him that had awaited Henry VI. 

Sir John Crosby’s name is principally remembered by the 
citizens of London as the builder of that splendid mansion in 
Bishopsgate Street, known by the designation of “ Crosby Place.” 
Let us turn for a moment from the busy throng of tens of 
thousands who are pouring past us, and take a look of that 
ancient edifice, which still retains the same air of impressive 
grandeur which it did in the days of the Plantagenets. The 







Silt JOTIX CROSBY. 51 

walls cannot speak, yet withal they are eloquent. “ To all those 
who feel says a late author “whether as a passing mood or more 
enduring sentiment, that consciousness of solitude in populous 
places, which Byron has so beautifully described, what can be 
more refreshing than to come upon these green spots in the 
desert—what more delightful than to step out of the whirl and 
the throng into some peaceful place, where the echo of your own 
footsteps is the loudest sound you may hear, and the rush of 
interesting recollections which people the silent, but most eloquent 
walls, the only crowd that can arrest your wanderings! No 
happier example of this contrast between the fancy-stirring past, 
and the matter-of-fact present, which London so frequently and 
forcibly presents, can perhaps be found than in the instance of 
the subject before us. It appears itself too absorbed in the re¬ 
membrance of its past glories, and of the great men who have 
lived within its sheltering arms, to heed the tumult without; and 
as to the visitor, the antique impressive air of the place, soon 
subdues his thoughts to its own colour.” 

Crosby Place is supposed to have been built by Sir John 
Crosby about the year 1471. The lease of its site, formerly in 
possession of Cataneo Pinelli, a merchant of Genoa, was granted 
to Sir John by Alice Ashfield, prioress of the Convent of St. 
Helen’s, adjoining ; this tenement was most probably pulled down 
to make way for the magnificent erection that soon appeared 
upon its site, and of which there is no reason to doubt but the 
more ancient parts are the genuine remains. Sir John Crosby 
died in 1475, so that he could have enjoyed but for a short time 
the splendour of Crosby Place, then noticed as the highest 
domestic building in London. 

Lady Crosby, his first wife, had died in 1466. His second 
wife, it would appear, survived him many years. He left a son, 
born after the date of his will in 1471, who probably died soon 
after attaining his majority, and with whom the family became 
extinct. A beautiful tomb, in the neighbouring church of St. 
Helen’s, marks the last resting place of his and his wife’s 
remains. 









52 


SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


“ Outstretched together are expressed, 

He and his lady fair, 

With hands uplifted on the breast 
In attitude of prayer ; 

Grim-visaged, clad in armour, he ; 

With ancient robe and head-gear she.” 

The following is the inscription upon the tablet:— 

ORATE PRO ANIMABUS, JOHANNIS CROSBY, 

MILITIS ALD. ATQUE TEMPORE YITAE MAJORIS STAPLE VILLE 
CALEIS, ET AGNETIS TJXORIS SUAE, AC THOMAE, RICHARDI, 
JOHANNIS, MARGARATAE ET JOHANNAE, LIBERORUM EJUSDEM 
JOHANNIS CROSBY, MILITIS, ILLE OBIIT MCCCCLXXY, ET ILLA 
MCCCCLXVI, QUORUM ANIMABUS PROPITIETUR DEUS.* 

The monument is thus described by Mr. Carlos :—“ It is of 
free-stone, ornamented at the sides and on the ends with quatre- 
foil panels, enclosing shields, each being separated by buttresses; 
on the ledger lie extended the full-length statues in alabaster, of 
Sir John Crosbie and his first wife Anney or Agnes—as a knight, 
he is attired in armour, with a mantle and collar of alternate roses 
and suns, the badge of King Edward the Fourth ; his hair is 
cropped and parted, and his head rests upon a helmet laid in the 
manner of a pillow ; at the right side is a dagger, but the effigy 
has no sword; at the feet is a griffin. The lady is dressed in a 

* The Latinitv of this epitaph is rather singular as respects the word 
animabus for animis, no such ablative being found in Roman authors.—The 
position which Sir John Crosby held, as Mayor of the Staple of Calais, 
was of considerable importance in its day. The merchants of the Staple 
were the English representatives of the Hans Merchants, an association 
succeeding to the Guilda Aula Theutonicorum of the reign of Henry III., 
and denominated afterwards the Flemish Guild, Merchants of Almaine, 
and of the Steel Yard. The chief functionary of the English body was 
denominated Alderman or Maior, and had an official residence at Calais ; 
they possessed many privileges, which they held subject to keeping in 
repair by money, and defending by arms, the “ Bishopsgate .” Neglecting 
this obligation, in the reign of Edward I., they were summoned before 
the Barons of the Exchequer, and in 1479 the same gate was by them 
beautifully built. In 1551, apparently dreading a revocation of their 
privileges, they had prepared another gate, but not in time to prevent the 
seizure of their liberties into the King’s hands, on the petition of the 
English merchants. 

























SIR JOHN CROSBY. 53 

close-bodied gown, in which her feet are folded, with long tight 
sleeves down to her wrists, and round the neck a collar of roses ; 
from the shoulders depends a mantle, and on the head is a cap 
close fitted to the ears, under which the hair is tucked; a veil 
falls off on the cushion upon which the head reposes, and this is 
supported by two angels ; at the feet lie two little dogs.” 

Considerable doubt has been expressed as to the meaning of 
the ornament, in the shape of a four-footed animal, appended 
to the collar of the effigy. Some inquirers are of opinion that it 
must have been intended for a white lion, the cognizance of the 
Earls of March, granted in some instances to the adherents of 
Edward IV. Others incline to the supposition that it was pur¬ 
posed to indicate a ram, the crest of Crosby. 

After the death of Alderman Crosby his house became con¬ 
nected with several of the most remarkable events of the 
fifteenth century, and on that account is deserving of particular 
notice in this place. It was for a considerable period the resi¬ 
dence of Richard III., and the scene where many of the schemes 
of his eventful life were plotted. In allusion to the circumstance 
of the monarch residing here the well known passage in Shak- 
spere will occur to all readers, where the Duke of Gloucester, at 
the conclusion of his successful wooing of the Lady Anne, thus 
addresses her:— 

“ And if thy poor devoted servant may 
But beg one favour at thy gracious hand, 

Thou dost confirm his happiness for ever. 

Anne .—What is it ? 

Glo .—That it may please you leave these sad designs 
To him that hath most cause to be a mourner, 

And presently repair to Crosby House ; 

Where, after I have solemnly interr’d 
At Chertsey monastery this noble King, 

And wet his grave with my repentant tears, 

I will with all expedient duty see you.” 

This passage, says an author already quoted, is of great importance; 
for the preservation of Crosby Hall, through all the vicissitudes 
of its fortunes, is attributable to the popularity it derived from it. 

What its own intrinsic beauty and historical character might not 









54 SIR JOHN CROSBY. 

have accomplished for it, has been done by a mere incidental 
notice in the great poet s writings. Richard s residence here, 
however, at the time of his marriage, 1473, is very doubtful, as 
Sir John Crosby was then alive. But a much more important 
event than the poet refers to unquestionably did take place in 
this building in connection w r ith Richard. It was in the hall of 
Crosby Place that he determined upon the deposition, perhaps 
the death, of the young King, Edward V., and it was here that 
all the plans were concocted for his own elevation to the vacant 
throne. When Edward IV. died, on the 9th of April, 1483, his 
eldest son, the Prince of Wales, was with his maternal uncle, 
the Earl of Rivers, at Ludlow Castle, and the younger with his 
mother Elizabeth, in London. Richard Duke of Gloster was at 
that moment at the head of an army devoted to his service in the 
marches of Scotland. He immediately marched upon York, 
where he caused his nephew to be proclaimed king, and from 
thence proceeded towards London. The prince or king was also, 
by his mother’s directions, advancing towards the metropolis. 
The Duke, aware of his movement, so well timed his own, that 
they met at Stony Stratford, without any appearance of intention 
on the part of the uncle. There the unsuspicious youth and his 
guardians were seized, the former being conveyed with all out- 
Avard marks of respect and allegiance to London, and the latter 
to Pontefract, where they were almost immediately beheaded. 
The news of these events preceded the chief actor in them. 
Elizabeth withdrew with the Duke of York to the Sanctuary at 
Westminster, and great was the commotion among the citizens. 
But the Lord Hastings, another of Richard’s destined victims, 
quieted their minds by assuring them that the Duke was faith¬ 
ful to his prince, and that the Earl of Rivers and his companion 
had merely been arrested for matters attempted by them against 
the King and the Duke of Buckingham. A curious kind of 
proof was displayed to the populace,—barrels filled with arms, 
which, their conductors said, the traitors had privately got together 
to destroy the two noble lords. “ It were alms to hang the 
traitors!” was the exclamation, as the spectators turned away, 

















SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


55 


perfectly satisfied with this species of optical logic. Such was 
the state of things when Richard arrived in London, and, hav¬ 
ing lodged the young King in the Tower, took up his residence 
for a time at Crosby Place. 

The various scenes which have been witnessed by the walls of 
Crosby Place since they were inhabited by Richard III., are 
worthy of being here briefly recorded. On the death of Eli¬ 
zabeth, the queen of Henry VII., in 1502, when Maximilian, 
the Emperor of Germany, sent into England a solemn embassy, 
they were triumphantly received into London, and lodged at 
Crosby Place. The ambassadors on this occasion were guests 
of Bartholomew Read, Lord Mayor in 1501-2.* f The next 
possessor of Crosby Place was Sir John Rest,f who was Lord 
Mayor in 1516 (the year of the Evil May Day), and by him it 
appears to have been sold, though at what time is uncertain, to 
the illustrious Chancellor of Henry VIII., Sir Thomas More. 
From the period of More’s marriage, in 1507, he resided in 
Bucklersbury. Perhaps it was soon after his mission, on which 
he had been sent to Bruges, in company with Cuthbert Tunstal, 
in 1514-15, that he purchased Crosby Place, for his advance¬ 
ment then became rapid. He was made Privy Councillor in 
1516, and in 1517 Master of the Requests. The journey to 
Bruges forms the ground-work of his famous romance, the 
“ Utopia.” At Bruges he supposes himself to have met with 
Raphael, the learned traveller, who had seen the country of 
Utopia, and describes to Sir Thomas More the manners and 
customs of its inhabitants. It is highly probable that this cele¬ 
brated work was written at Crosby Place. So great was the 
favour which More now possessed with his royal master, that 
the latter was accustomed not unfrequently to come and spend 
the day with his witty and learned favourite, without even the 
formality of a previous notice. In 1523 Sir Thomas More sold 
Crosby Place to Antonio Bonvisi, a merchant of Lucca, then 
settled in England, and, according to More’s own words, his 

* Vide Life of Lord Mayor Read. 

f Vide Life of Sir John Rest (Lord Mayor). 









56 SIR JOHN CROSRY. 

dearest friend. After More’s committal to the Tower, but for 
Bonvisi, with possibly another friend or two, and Margaret 
Roper, More’s daughter, this great and good man would have 
been left by his murderers without proper clothes to cover him, 
or proper food to eat. When the order for his execution came 
to the Tower, and Sir Thomas Pope, his “regular good friend,” 
having informed him of his fate—he was to die before nine in 
the morning of the same day—had left him to himself, Sir 
Thomas, as one that had been invited to a solemn banquet, 
changed himself into his best apparel, and put on his silk 
camlet gown, which his “ entire friend Antonio Bonvisi,” gave 
him whilst in the Tower. He was induced, however, to take it 
off again, as it would otherwise become a perquisite of the exe¬ 
cutioner. He then went cheerfully to the block, his wit and 
humour flashing brightly to the last, “ Mr. Lieutenant, see me 
safe up,” said he, referring to the danger that had been expressed 
of the scaffold, “ and for my coming down let me shift for my¬ 
self.” So perished this the greatest of the inhabitants of Crosby 
Place. His connection with it can scarcely be said to have 
ended even then; for Bonvisi, in 1547, leased Crosby Place to 
William Roper, the husband of More’s favourite daughter, Mar¬ 
garet, the affectionate and noble high-spirited woman who so 
greatly contributed to the comfort of her father in his worst 
trials ; and to William Rastell, his nephew, the celebrated printer. 
In the reign of Edward VI., Bonvisi, Roper, and Rastell appear 
to have been all driven abroad by religious persecution, and the 
estate of Crosby Hall forfeited. It was then granted to Sir 
Thomas D’Arcy, knight, Lord D’Arcy of Chule. But immedi¬ 
ately on the accession of Mary, the persecution having changed 
sides, Bonvisi and his friends were free to return, which they did 
in the first year of her reign, and immediately regained their pro¬ 
perty. The next proprietors were Peter Crowle, Germayne 
Cioll, who married a cousin of Sir Thomas Gresham’s (the 
daughter of Sir John Gresham, with whom Thomas was appren¬ 
ticed,) and William Bond, Alderman of London, and his sons. 
Some extensive alterations are supposed -to have been made 


















SIB. JOHN CBOSBY. 57 

during Bond's proprietorship ; a turret in particular is men¬ 
tioned as having been built by him, which greatly increased 
the height of the building. No traces of this turret are now to 
be found.*' In 1594 Lord Mayor Sir John Spencer purchased 
Crosby Place, and kept his mayoralty that year in it, with 
great splendour, f He was perhaps the richest citizen of his 
day, as he died worth nearly a million sterling. He was called 
“The Rich Spencer.” His daughter and sole heiress married 
William, the second Lord Compton, afterwards Earl of North¬ 
ampton, who was so transported at the value of his inheritance 
that he lost his w r its, and remained for some years in that state. 

During Spencer’s proprietorship, ambassadors were entertained 
on several occasions here. The most important event of this 
kind was when M. de Rosney, afterwards the celebrated Duke of 
Sully, Henry IV. of France’s great adviser, came to London on a 
special embassy to James II. in the hope of inducing James to 
maintain the league which had existed between Elizabeth, France, 
and the Hollanders, and to prevent him from making peace with 
Roman Catholic Spain. During the occupancy of Crosby Place 
by Lord Compton and his rich wife, another distinguished tenant 
graced its walls. This was the lady whose name was so affec¬ 
tionately attached by Sir Philip Sidney to his famous romance 
“ The Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia,” in compliment to his 
beloved sister. We need scarcely add that this was the lady 
whom Ben Jonson has celebrated in one of the prettiest epitaphs 
in our language. The Countess of Pembroke lived so many years 
in Crosby Place that her history is a part of its own: 

“ Underneath this sable hearse 
Lies the subject of all verse : 

Sydney’s sister, Pembroke’s mother, 

Death, ere thou canst find another, 

Good, and fair, and wise as she, 

Time shall throw a dart at thee !” 

Spencer, Earl of Northampton, the son of the last-mentioned 

* See Life of William Bond (Alderman). 

f See Life of Sir John Spencer (Lord Mayor). 




58 SIR JOHN CROSBY. 

proprietor, resided here in 1638. This nobleman was one of the 
most strenuous supporters of Charles I., and almost the first of 
his order who shed his blood in his service. He was killed by 
the King’s side at Hopton Heath, in Staffordshire, in 1642. 
Two years before, Crosby Place had been leased to Sir John 
Langham, who was Sheriff in 1642, during whose occupation it is 
said to have been used as a prison for royalists. His son, Sir 
Stephen Langham, succeeded him, and it is supposed that it was 
during his tenancy that the fire occurred by which Crosby Place 
was so greatly injured, that from that period it ceased to be used 
as a dwelling. In 1672 the hall was converted into a Presby¬ 
terian meeting-house, and so remained for nearly a century (a 
son of the eminent divine, Calamy, was one of the assistant 
preachers here about 1726), and in 1677 the present houses in 
Crosby Square were built on the ruins of the parts of the old 
mansion that had been destroyed. Its history is now nearly 
brought to a conclusion. After the disuse of the hall as a meet¬ 
ing-house it was degraded into a packer’s warehouse, and, whilst 
thus occupied, received the most serious injury from the altera¬ 
tions which were made in it. In 1831 the lease upon which the 
hall had been held expired ; and from that time the most unre¬ 
mitting exertions have been made by a committee of gentlemen, 
who had taste to appreciate the historical and architectural value 
of Crosby Place, to restore the remaining parts of the structure 
to their pristine state : and the subscriptions received have, in a 
great measure, enabled them to accomplish this object. Exten¬ 
sive reparations have taken place, and much of the original man¬ 
sion has been rebuilt. 

“ The fretted roof look’d dark and cold, 

And tatter’d all around; 

The carved work of ages old 
Dropp’d, wither’d on the ground ; 

The casements’ antique tracery 
Was eaten by the dew, 

And the night-breeze, whistling mournfully, 

Crept keen and coldly through.” 

The first stone of the new works was laid on the 27th of June, 









SIR JOHN CROSBY. 59 

1836, by the Right Honourable W. T. Copeland, Lord Mayor, 
when a plan of them, with other documents of the subject, were 
deposited in a bottle, and the latter placed in a cavity of the 
stone formed to receive it. After that portion of the ceremony 
was over, the Lord Mayor led the way into the hall, which was 
fitted up in a characteristic manner for the occasion. Banners 
floated along the walls, the floor was strewed with rushes, and a 
genuine old Elizabethan breakfast, including a noble baron of beef, 
w r as spread upon the tables. 

Founded during a period separated by a broad line of demar¬ 
cation from modern history, the walls of Crosby Place bear 
witness to a time when tyranny in the king, oppression by the 
nobles, and ignorance in the people, led to superstition in religion, 
warfare in the state, and fierce manners, and brutal passions in 
social life: continued to our times, the building exists under 
different circumstances, and is applied to new purposes. It has 
been restored at a period when our reverence for the throne is 
augmented by personal attachment to the illustrious individual 
who fills it; when the clue administration of the law provides for 
the security of our property, and the protection of our persons ; 
when our free institutions expand themselves, to keep pace with 
our increased knowledge, and our extended empire; when the 
hand of industry is applying all that philosophy has shown to be 
practicable; when literature is not merely a taste, but the pur¬ 
suit of thousands ; when patient research is rescuing from oblivion 
the treasures of the past, and the missionaries of physical and moral 
science spread abroad the discoveries of the present, time; and 
when our language and our laws give freedom and elevation when¬ 
ever our commerce has reached, or our people have settled. 

For a brief description of Crosby Place, as it at present appears 
to the eye of a spectator, we shall adopt the language of a 
work, already largely had recourse to —“ Although as a work of 
art, Crosby Place presents some unrivalled features,—the roof of 
its hall for instance,—yet its historical recollections constitute its 
greatest charm. If we take as our guide the plan of the vaults 

* “ London,” by C. Knight. 













60 


SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


still existing beneath the site of Crosby Place and the neighbour¬ 
hood, it will be evident that the original edifice must have been 
as magnificent for its extent as for the general beauty of its deco¬ 
rations. Large as is the space occupied by the hall and the 
council-chamber, with the throne-room above, (the only remain¬ 
ing portions of Crosby Place,) yet it scarcely occupies half the 
extent denoted by the remains below the soil. Among these 
remains there is one particularly interesting feature, a crypt with 
a finely groined roof, now occupied as a wine cellar. From its 
situation it appears highly probable that this stood beneath a 
chapel belonging to Crosby Place; although we must also state 
that it is the opinion of persons well qualified to judge, that it 
belonged to a chapel of the old Priory of St. Helen’s. The 
entrance to Crosby Place is through a small gateway. The 
exterior of the hall consists of one story only, with its lofty and 
elegant windows, and its exquisitely beautiful oriel -window, 
reaches from the ground to the top of the building, and the exte¬ 
rior of the council-chamber, with the throne-room above. It 
may be noticed that the two windows to the extreme right 
of the hall differ from the remainder, in being closer together. 
These give light to a part of the building which formed the 
gallery of the hall, extending over the gateway, which 
leads into Crosby Square, formerly the inner court of the great 
mansion. Beneath this gateway, it is supposed, was the original 
entrance to the hall; at present, however, we reach the interior 
of Crosby Place through a low postern doorway, situated in the 
angle between the wall of the council-chamber and the great 
oriel window. We first enter upon the council-chamber, or, as 
it is sometimes called, the dining-room. This is lighted by two 
windows which look into the small quadrangle, we have just 
quitted, and by one situated in the left-hand corner of the oppo¬ 
site wall. This window is large, lofty, and of a very unique 
charactei—a restoiation of a former work. There was formerly 
also a beautiful bay window-looking into the quadrangle, and the 
blank arch of which still remains. The only other peculiar 
features of this room are the flat, massy-ribbed ceiling, which is 











































SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


61 


modern, (and although in accordance with the character of the 
room) forms still but a poor substitute for the elaborately elegant 
work of stucco and gold, with dropping pendants, which formerly 
met the eye in the same place; and the chimney-piece, which 
consists of a low, pointed, and very broad arch, set within square 
deep mouldings. We next ascend to the throne-room ; why so 
called it is impossible to say. This is a very beautiful room, with 
a rounded ceiling, divided into small compartments by slender 
ribs of oak, and lighted in a very similar manner to the room 
beneath. One of the windows, however, looking into the quad¬ 
rangle has the additional ornament of a richly-painted border, 
and the window in the corner is still more unique, as well as 
infinitely more beautiful, than that of the council-chamber directly 
below\ It extends from floor to ceiling, is situated within a small 
recess panelled at the sides and beautifully ornamented at the 
top, and is divided into two compartments by a slender stem in 
the centre, which at the top has a small knot of ornament falling, 
like a bunch of fruit, a little on each side, and giving to the stem, 
when seen from, the opposite wall, one of the most graceful forms 
that it is possible to conceive. Descending to the council-cham¬ 
ber, we find, besides the low postern door through "which we 
entered, a larger one, "which admits us into the innermost sanc¬ 
tuary of the place,—the Great Hall. Of the noble proportions 
of this hall, and the surpassing beauty of its roof, built no 
less than three hundred and sixty years ago, an adequate 
conception could scarcely be formed from any description we 
could give. In dimensions, it is 54 feet long, 27| broad, and 
40 feet high. The breadth of the oriel window is 10 feet 10 
inches, and its height the height of the hall. This window is 
richly decorated with a series of armorial bearings, the .tasteful 
and munificent present of Thomas Willemest, Esq., and which, 
though of so recent an origin, have all the appearance of ancient 
works of art. We see among them the arms of the Prioress of St. 
Helen’s, the earliest proprietor of the place, Sir John Crosby, the 
builder, of the City of London, so many of whose eminent citizens 
have made the hall ring again with the sound of festive hospi- 
























62 


SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


tality, of Richard the “ crook-backed tyrant,” whose few days’ 
residence there will preserve the name of Crosby Place when the 
last vestige of its architectural glories shall have disappeared, and 
of Henry's murdered Chancellor, Sir Thomas More, the wise, 
learned, amiable, and witty author of the “ Utopia.” The re¬ 
mainder comprise the arms and badges of Richard's Queen, and 
of the House of York, Sir Thomas D’Arcy, William Bond and his 
company, and the “ Rich Spencer” and his company. The other 
windows of the hall are similarly decorated, those on the same 
side containing the arms of various subscribers to the expenses of 
the restoration, and those on the opposite, among others, of Sir 
John Rest, the Duke of Sully, Lord Compton, and the present 
owner, W. P. Williams Freeman, Esq. In the very beautiful 
roof of the oriel window we perceive, among the knots of foliage 
that still bloom for us as they bloomed for our ancestors hundreds 
of years ago, a boss of superior size, on which is carved in relief 
a ram trippant,—the crest of Sir John Crosby, and which is looked 
upon, and in all probability correctly, as having been placed there 
by Sir John himself to commemorate his name as the founder of 
the magnificence around. The louvre, or opening in the centre 
of the roof, has caused much discussion. In ancient halls the 
smoke had frequently no other mode of escape than by the louvre 
or where there is a regular chimney, with a front like that of the 
council-chamber:—perhaps the chimney was of later construction. 
The aperture of the louvre is now closed by the same piece of 
wood-work that was formerly elevated above it. The pavement 
of the hall remains to a certain extent in its original state, when 
it was paved with stone in small square slabs arranged diagonally, 
the whole being divided by five lines formed in a similar manner, 
running from one end of the hall to the other. “ It is singular,” 
says Mr. Blackburne* “ that Crosby Hall shows no indication of 
a raised dais; and the only instance I recollect of a similar de¬ 
parture from the general custom is to be met with at Sawston 
Hall, Cambridgeshire.” The walls of the part thus distinguished 
were usually hung with arras, and this was no doubt the case in 

* Architectural and Historical Account of Crosby Tlace. 



























SIR JOHN CROSBY. 


63 


Crosby Hall. The dais here must have occupied a very large 
space, as the oriel window, which was always included in it, 
stands at some considerable distance from the northern wall. In 
this wall there was most probably a communication with a little 
room still existing behind it, from which a handsome doorway, 
with three lights above (lately restored), led into the part which 
was then, it is supposed, the small private garden or “pleasaunce” 
of the mansion, but which now forms an open space in front of 
St. Helen’s Church. Lastly, we may notice the gallery of the 
hall, which still remains, though stripped of all its decoration, and 
hidden by the canvass which covers that end of the room. Gal¬ 
leries of this kind were generally denominated the Minstrels’ 
Gallery, and the name bespeaks its use. 

At the first commemoration of Sir Thomas Gresham, cele¬ 
brated on the 12th of July, 1832, the gallery of Crosby 
Hall was occupied by the choir engaged in the musical 
performance of that interesting festival after the conclusion 
of the service in the church. This, if we may adopt the 
opinion of the eloquent Gresham professor of music, given 
in a lecture delivered in Crosby Hall in 1838, was but a type 
of the rich musical memories of the place. Reference is made 
by that gentleman to one of the many madrigals, and other 
vocal pieces, composed in honour of the “ fair vestal throned 
by the west,” under the poetical appellation of Oriana, and 
which it has been supposed Elizabeth herself could not resist 
from encouraging.* 


* “ In this spacious and beautiful hall we may not only be sure that these 
compositions have often been sung, but this is tbe only remaining edifice 
in London in which we may feel equally assured that some of our greatest 
vocal writers have assembled to give and to receive pleasure in the social 
performance of their own compositions. Near to this spot was born and 
lived the celebrated William Byrdc, whose writings remain to this day 
monuments of splendid genius and profound erudition ; from whom his 
scholar, Morley, gratefully confessed to have ‘ received the will and the 
power to enter into the contemplation and searching out of the hidden 
mysteries and divine enjoyments of his art, and derived the wish and the 
means to live in after times.’ Near to this spot was also born the pupil 
whose affectionate gratitude is recorded in these words, and whose works 





























64 EDMUND SHAW. 


SIR EDMUND SHAW, 

(LORD MAYOR.) 

This remarkable historical personage, like his cotemporary, Sir 
John Crosby, lived in an age made great not only by its events, 
but also by the character of its actors,—an age in which the fate 
of civil, religious, and political liberty in England hung upon the 
triumph of one of two great parties in the state, warring against 
each other, in all the bitterness of sanguinary conflict. During 
this stormy period blood had been shed in torrents; but it fell 
upon the earth like the large drops of rain from the passing 
thundercloud of summer, to bring forth fruit in due season. 

abundantly prove that he had indulged in no vain and visionary anticipa¬ 
tions in predicting their prolonged existence. Near to this spot also lived 
the sweetest of all that illustrious choir, who enriched our art with never- 
dying strains, John Wilbye. Near this spot were produced those compo¬ 
sitions which are still the study and delight of his successors, and which 
are destined to charm generations yet to come. Near this spot, too, stood 
the princely mansion of Gresham, bequeathed by him to the use and 
benefit of his fellow-citizens, where he designed instruction in religion, in 
science, and in art, to be freely and liberally dispensed to all; founding 
a temple of learning, whose doors should be open, and whose advantages 
should be accessible to every inquirer after knowledge however humble 
in station or mean in acquirements ; and, lastly, near this spot repose the 
honoured remains of its founder (in the same church that contains the 
ashes of Sir John Crosby, the founder of the splendid “Place”). Here, 
then, a thousand interesting associations crowd upon the mind, and 
connect themselves with the lives and labours of these illustrious men; 
for here the musician, as well as the architect and the historian, feels that 
he is treading classic ground. Imagination calls up the time when this 
hall was thronged with the noble, the learned, the graceful of past ages ; 
when the hospitable board was here spread, and among the guests, Gre¬ 
sham, the princely merchant, the friend, and the neighbour-; Byrdc, 
Wilbye, Morley, the most accomplished musicians of their time, all living- 
under the shadow of this building, when this spacious roof echoed to the 
sound of their harmonies, and when “ The health of the Queen” was 
followed by some madrigal in praise of fair Oriana.” 












SIR EDMUND SHAW. 


G') 


Edmund Shaw was born in London during the first 
quarter of the fifteenth century. His family appear to have been 
of considerable wealth and substance, and from the social posi¬ 
tion which the Shaws had already occupied for a considerable 
period in the metropolis, it is evident that the Lord Mayor after¬ 
wards immortalised by the bard of Avon, was sprung from a race 
of considerable note. He was a member of the Company of 
Goldsmiths, and in the year 1475, in conjunction with Aider- 
man Hill, he served the office of Sheriff. This was in the 
mayoralty of Robert Bassett, who highly distinguished himself in 
repelling the insurgents from the city, on the occasion of the 
rebellion of Falconbridge, four years previously. In the year 
1482, Shaw was raised to the civic chair, and from the mode of 
conduct which he displayed in the performance of the duties of 
his office, he derived his chief claims for remembrance by 
posterity. 

It is impossible to enter into even a cursory relation of the 
transactions of so remarkable an actor in the events of the wildest 
period in the history of our country, without touching, to some 
extent, upon the nature of the cause which he espoused. 

Of the personal character of Shaw, unconnected with the great 
drama of bloodshed which passed before the inhabitants of this 
country, during the period he held the distinguished office of 
Lord Mayor, no authentic notices whatever have descended to us. 
It has often been a matter of regret with historians, that in cases 
where it would have been not only entertaining, but instructive, 
to have preserved some relic which might have thrown light on 
the calmer but more characteristic features of existence, ordinary 
record never failed to be at fault. Sir Edmund Shaw 
seems to have been a zealous partisan of the house of York, and 
from the commencement of the struggle which ended in the 
destruction of the house of Plantagenet, to have stuck by the 
claims of that family whose last monarch perished on Bosworth 
Field, in the person of Richard the Third. 

The first swords in the civil war, which made the best blood 
in England flow like water, throughout the greater part of a 


F 
















































66 


SHI EDMUND SHAW. 


quarter of a century, were crossed at Saint Albans, in the year 
1455, in the reign of Henry the Sixth. 

This monarch, son of the hero of Agincourt, was remarkable 
for the extreme weakness of his character. His cousin, Richard, 
Duke of York, descended from an elder son of Edward the Third, 
and therefore possessed of a superior title to the throne, conceived 
that Henry’s imbecility afforded a good opportunity for asserting 
what he thought his birthright. Thus commenced the famous 
Wars of the Roses, as they were called, from the badges of the 
families of York and Lancaster, the former of which was a red, 
while the latter was a white rose. In 1454, the Duke gained a 
decisive victory over the forces of Henry, which were led by his 
spirited consort, Margaret of Anjou. In some succeeding en¬ 
gagements, the friends of Henry were victorious ; and at length, 
in the battle of Wakefield, December 24, 1460, the forces of the 
Duke of York were signally defeated, and himself, with one of 
his sons, taken and put to death. His pretensions were then 
taken up by his eldest son Edward, who, with the assistance of 
the Earl of Warwick, gained such advantages next year that he 
assumed the crown. Before this was accomplished, many 
had fallen on both sides. Henry, who cared little for the pomp 
of sovereignty, was confined in the Tower. 

Edward, of the House of York, styled Edward the Fourth, who 
commenced his reign in the nineteenth year of his age, reigned 
ten years, perpetually disturbed by renewed attempts of the Lan¬ 
castrian party, of which he mercilessly sacrificed many thousands, 
who fell into his hands. At length, having offended the Earl of 
Warwick, who had been chiefly instrumental in placing him upon 
the throne, that powerful nobleman raised an insurrection against 
him, and in eleven days was master of the kingdom, while Ed¬ 
ward had to take refuge on the continent. Henry the Sixth was 
then restored, and Warwick acquired the title of King-maker. 
Nine months after (1471) Edward landed with a small body of 
followers, and having called his partisans around him, overthrew 
and killed Warwick at Saint Albans. Margaret of Anjou, who 
had fought battles for her husband in almost every province of 


























SIR EDMUND SHAW. 67 

England, gathered a new army, and opposed Edward at Tewkes¬ 
bury Park, where she was completely routed. Her son and 
husband being taken, were routed in cold blood, and she her¬ 
self spent the remainder of her singular life in France. Edward 
reigned, a profligate and a tyrant, till 1483, when he died in the 
forty-second year of his age. He had previously caused his 
brother, the equally profligate Duke of Clarence, to be drowned 
in a butt of malmsey wine. 

And now begins this “ strange eventful history.” Edward the 
Fifth, the eldest son of Edward the Fourth, was a boy of eleven 
years when he succeeded to the throne. His uncle, Richard, the 
Duke of Gloucester, a wicked and deformed wretch, yet possessed 
of the most daring and ambitious intellect, aspired to supreme 
power. Already had he caused the greatest internal convulsions 
in the kingdom, and from the savage manner in which he seemed 
to gloat over the perpetration of cruelty in every form, those who 
were acquainted with his nature, could have slight hopes that the 
minority of a child of tender years should glide away with either 
care for the well-being of the country, or without some striking 
demonstration of the real temper of the tyrant. Gloucester was 
appointed Protector, and laid his schemes for sovereignty with all 
due caution and deliberation. 

With this view, therefore, he endeavoured to engage 
in his service a great number of profligate persons of des¬ 
perate fortunes, without fear, conscience, or any other principle of 
action than self-interest; who would execute his commands and 
directions, how wicked and cruel soever they might be, without 
remorse or hesitation. While he privately enlisted this band of 
desperadoes, he still maintained his dissimulation in the eyes of 
the world, affecting to prepare for the coronation of his nephew, 
at which he summoned all gentlemen possessing forty pounds a 
year, to attend and receive the honour of knighthood. His next 
scheme was to find out a pretence for excluding the children 
of Edward from the throne, as well as those of Clarence, who 
stood between him and his hopes. When the resolution is once 
taken, pretences are easily invented to give it countenance. His 








68 


SIR EDMUND SHAAV. 


emissaries began to prepare the public for his usurpation, by 
spreading reports to the prejudice of his mother’s reputation. 
They whispered about, that the old Duchess of York had been 
false to her husband’s bed, and that neither Edward nor Clarence 
were begotten by their reputed father, whereas, Richard wore his 
express image, both in the features of his countenance, and linea¬ 
ments of his mind and disposition. Not contented with aspers¬ 
ing the character of a lady, which had hitherto been unblemished, 
they fixed the imputation of bastardy upon Edward’s children, 
in consequence of the pretended marriage, by which they said he 
was previously contracted to Elizabeth Lucy. They insinuated, 
that the children of Clarence were rendered incapable of succeed¬ 
ing to the throne, by the attainder of their father, and mentioned 
Richard, not only as the true heir of blood, but also as a prince 
possessed of every quality that could adorn a crown. 

These reports were disseminated in such an artful manner, that 
they gained credit among the lower class of people, while they 
gave umbrage to those noblemen who were attached to the family 
of the late king, and in particular to Lord Hastings, who was 
still entirely ignorant of Richard’s real design. The Protector was 
well acquainted with his sentiments, but had hitherto lived upon 
terms of friendship with him, on account of his great interest in 
the City of London, nor was he altogether without hope of bring¬ 
ing him entirely over to his interest. He likewise cultivated a 
seeming friendship with the two archbishops, the Bishop of Ely, 
and the Lord Stanley, who were well wishers to the two young 
princes, because he found his account in their countenance; and 
resolved to wear the mask until he should have no further occa¬ 
sion for their assistance. In order to amuse them in the mean 
time, he fixed a day for the coronation of Edward, and divided 
his council, on pretence of making more expedition in preparing 
for that solemnity. Amongst the individuals whom Gloucester 
chose on this occasion, as well fitted to promote his ultimate 
intentions, so far as the metropolis was concerned, was Edmund 
Shaw, the subject of our notice, and now Lord Mayor of the 
city. Richard’s creatures and sycophants sat at West- 











SIR EDMUND SHAW. 


69 


minster, attended by our worthy, while the noblemen that 
favoured the cause of Edward, were detached in a separate com¬ 
mittee at the Tower, where they met every day to superintend 
the preparations. They soon perceived that obstacles were indus¬ 
triously raised to prevent the execution of their orders—that very 
few persons were admitted to the King, who was attended by a 
small number of domestics, while his uncle was continually sur¬ 
rounded by swarms of courtiers, whom he caressed with such 
affability as seemed contrary to his. natural disposition. These 
circumstances, added to the delay of the coronation, alarmed the 
Lord Stanley, who now began to suspect the Duke of Gloucester 
of sinister designs. He freely communicated his suspicions to 
his colleagues, and, as the resolutions of the other council were 
mysteriously concealed from their knowledge, proposed that they 
should, without loss of time, concert proper measures for the 
safety of their sovereign. The Lord Hastings, who firmly be¬ 
lieved that the Protector had no other design but that of destroy¬ 
ing the queen’s faction, dispelled these just suspicions, by 
assuring them there was nothing to be feared from the other 
council, and offered to pawn his head, that if they should take any 
step to the prejudice of the King and the realm, he should be 
informed of it by one of the members who was entirely devoted 
to his interest. This was his friend and confidant Catesby ; but 
he little dreamed that this man betrayed him, and that such was 
the price by which he purchased the confidence of the Protector. 
The Lord Stanley and his colleagues allowed themselves to be 
convinced by the assurances of Hastings, whose intelligence they 
preferred to their own observations, and thus neglected the oppor¬ 
tunity which never recurred. 

Meanwhile, Richard thought it was now high time, either to 
make a convert of Hastings to his views, or to destroy him at 
once : for this purpose he employed Catesby to sound that 
nobleman, touching his opinion of the protector's right, which 
happened at that time to be the common subject of conversation. 

Buck. Go, gentle Catesby, 

And, as it were far off, sound thou Lord Hastings 
How he doth stand affected to our purpose; 



























70 


SIK EDMUND SHAW. 


And summon him to-morrow to the Tower, 

To sit about the coronation. 

If thou dost find him tractable to us, 

Encourage him, and tell him all our reasons: 

If he be leaden, icy, cold, unwilling, 

Be thou so too ; and so break off the talk, 

And give us notice of his inclinations : 

For we to-morrow hold divided councils, 

Wherein thyself shalt highly be employ’d. 

Glo. Shall we hear from you, Catesby, ere we sleep ? 

Cate. You shall, my Lord, 

Glo. At Crosby-house, there shall you find us both. 

Hastings not only refuted all the suggestions concerning the 

bastardy of Edward and his children; but assured Catesby, that 
he would with all his interest, and even his heart’s blood, support 
the young princes against all their enemies. This declaration 
was immediately reported to the Protector, who being extremely 
desirous of engaging Hastings in his design, directed Catesby to 
try him once more, and even hint the project which was formed 
for the exclusion of his nephews. Catesby, in his second conver¬ 
sation, found him more than ever determined to oppose any 
enterprise that should he formed against his master’s children; 
and Richard, for that very reason, devoted him to immediate 
death. He repaired in the morning to the council in the Tower, 
where he behaved with remarkable affability to the members; 
and after some stay withdrew, desiring them to consider their 
deliberations, and give the last orders touching the ceremony of 
the coronation, which had been too long delayed. In about an 
hour after his departure, he returned with a frowning aspect, 
biting his lips, and exhibiting all the marks of internal agitation. 

“ My lords,” said he “ what punishment do those deserve who 
have conspired against my life ?” 

The whole council was confounded at this question ; and the 
Lord Hastings replied, in the name of the rest, that whoever was 
guilty of such a crime ought to he punished as a traitor. 

“ It is no other,” cried Richard, “ than that sorceress my 
sister-in-law, with her accomplices.” 

Before his hearers had time to recollect themselves from the 
fear and astonishment which this prelude produced, he hared his 
left arm, which was withered, and presented it to the council. 



















SIR EDMUND SHAW. 


71 


“ Behold,*’ said he, “ what that sorceress, and the wretched 
Shore have done by the power of their incantations! they have 
reduced this arm to the condition in which you now see it; and 
the rest of my body would have shared the same fate, if, by the 
singular protection of heaven, their infamous practices had not 
been discovered.” 

These words redoubled their amazement and terror, as they 
well knew his arm had been always in that shrivelled con¬ 
dition ; and as they were fully persuaded, if the Queen had 
formed any such design, she would never have communicated it 
to Jane Shore, who had been the concubine of her husband, and 
now lived on the same footing with the Lord Hastings, who was 
the Queen’s professed enemy. This nobleman could not help 
expressing his doubts about the truth of the information, by 
saying, if they w r ere guilty, they deserved to be punished. 

“How!” cried the Protector, with great emotion, “dost thou 
answer me with an If, as if I had forged the accusation ? I tell 
thee they have plotted against my life, and thou thyself art one 
of their accomplices.” 

So saying, he struck the table twice, and immediately the hall 
was filled with armed men : then, turning to Hastings, he said, 

“ I arrest thee for the crime of treason.” 

“ Who, me, my lord!” replied that unfortunate nobleman. 

“ Yes, thee, thou traitor,” exclaimed the Protector, and ordered 
him to be seized by the soldiers. 

This arrest occasioned a tumult in the apartment, during which 
one of the soldiers attempted to cleave the head of Lord Stanley, 
with a battle-axe, on pretence of keeping the peace, but he 
missed his aim; and Stanley, by creeping under the table, 
saved his life at the expence of a dangerous wound. Never¬ 
theless, he was arrested, together with the Archbishop of York, 
and the Bishop of Ely ; but, as for Hastings, Richard was so 
bent upon his destruction, that he swore he would not dine, 
until his head should be severed from his shoulders; so that he 
had just time to confess himself to the first priest that could be 
found, and then was beheaded on a log of timber. 










72 


Silt EDMUND SIIAW. 


Richard, knowing how much Hastings was beloved by the 
citizens of London, thought it necessary to use some pretext for 
this precipitate execution, and sent a message to Lord Mayor Shaw, 
and the aldermen, desiring to see them immediately. In the meantime 
he and Buckingham cased themselves up in rusty armour; and 
when the magistracy of London repaired to the Tower, in 
obedience to his message, he told them that the Lord Hastings, 
and some others had conspired against his life. He said he had 
not been informed of their design till ten in the morning, when 
the proofs appeared so plain, that the king and council thought 
it absolutely necessary to execute Hastings without delay, as they 
understood a great number of people were ready to rise in his 
favour; that, in such a pressing emergency, he was fain to put 
on the first armour he could find, for the security of his person, 
and that he had sent for them to be witnesses of the truth, that 
they might inform the people, and prevent or appease the tumults 
which ill-designing persons might raise in the city. The Mayor 
and Aldermen saw through the pretext; they durst not, how¬ 
ever signify their real sentiments, but promised to obey his 
orders, and withdrew. Immediately after this conference, a 
proclamation was published in the king's name, declaring, that 
as Lord Hastings had entered into a conspiracy to seize his 
majesty’s person, and slay the protector and the Duke of 
Buckingham, that he might govern the realm according to his 
own pleasure, the King, for the prevention of this wicked design, 
had, by the advice of his council, punished him without delay: 
that no person was ever more deserving of the death of a traitor 
than Hastings, who had advised the late King to take so many 
fatal steps contrary to the liberty and privileges of the people; 
that he had been the conductor and companion of Edward’s 
debauchery; and that he had spent the last night with Jane 
Shore, the accomplice of all his crimes, and of that in particular 
for which he suffered. This proclamation contained many other 
aspersions calculated to diminish the affection which the people 
had always expressed for Lord Hastings, and anticipate their 
compassion; but it did not produce the desired effect. 






















































Sill EDMUND SHAW. 


73 


Shore, being apprehended and brought before the Council, the 
Duke of Gloucester accused her of having practised witchcraft, 
and entered into the conspiracy of Hastings, against his life. But 
she made her innocence appear so plain, that they could not, with 
any shadow of justice, condemn her upon this accusation. She 
was next, prosecuted for the irregularities of her life, which she 
could not deny, and being delivered to the ecclesiastical authori¬ 
ties, was condemned to do public penance in Saint Paul’s, and to 
walk in procession before the cross, barefoot, half-naked, and a 
burning taper in her hand. 

These executions and cruelties, without any form and 
process, together with the imprisonment of the Archbishop of 
York, the Bishop of Ely, and the Lord Stanley, left the people 
no reason to doubt but that the Protector had a design upon the 
crown, and the whole kingdom was filled with consternation. 
This was a juncture at which he resolved to manifest his inten¬ 
tion ; but, as he desired to have the approbation of the people of 
London, he consulted with his confidant, the Duke of Bucking¬ 
ham, about means for procuring this advantage. They resolved 
to redouble their industry in persuading the people that the chil¬ 
dren of Edward were bastards, on the supposition that those 
whom their emissaries could not convince would be deterred from 
attempting to undeceive their neighbours. 

Now, at this period there were resident in London two clergy¬ 
men, Dr. Ralph Shaw, and Friar Pinker, Provincial of the 
Augustine Friars, both of high distinction as preachers. Bought 
over to the side of Gloucester, these personages were devoted, 
heart and soul to the task of instilling into the public mind the 
justice of his claim. Shaw was the Mayor’s brother, and 
stood very high in the estimation of the tyrant. 

Things having been all arranged, on an appointed day, Dr. Shaw 
preached a sermon at St. Paul’s Cross, in which he not only en¬ 
larged upon Edward’s previous marriage, with Elizabeth 
Lucy, which rendered his other children illegitimate, but 
also expatiated upon the bastardy of Edward himself, and 
his brother Clarence, who, he affirmed, were begotten by 



























74 SIR EDMUND SHAW. 

persons whom the Duchess of York admitted to her bed in the 
absence of her husband. Then he made allusion to the Duke of 
Gloucester, whom he represented as the true son of York, whom 
he perfectly resembled in his features as well as in his virtues, 
and poured forth an extravagant panegyric of Richard, during 
which the latter intended to have presented himself to the people 
in hope that, moved by the eloquence of the preacher, they would 
have saluted him as King. The Duke, however, did not arrive 
until the doctor had exhausted his encomium, and began to dis¬ 
cuss another subject. Nevertheless, seeing the Protector 
approach, he repeated his praise with the most fulsome exagge¬ 
ration, while Richard walked through the crowd to his place. 
But, instead of hearing the acclamation of “ Long live King 
Richard!” he saw the audience hang their heads in profound 
silence, detesting the venality of the preacher, who forfeited all 
his popularity by this shameful prostitution of his talent, and con¬ 
cealed himself in retirement, where, according to Stow, he soon 
died of sorrow and remorse. 

Shaw’s sermon being so unfavourably received, the Duke of 
Buckingham, who was famed for his elocution, undertook to ha¬ 
rangue the people on the Tuesday following at Guildhall. There 
the aldermen and council being assembled by the Lord Mayor, 
the Duke resumed the topics which Dr. Shaw had handled so 
unsuccessfully. He told them that the Lords and Commons of 
the kingdom had declared that no bastard should sit upon the 
throne of England, and insisted upon the crown being adjudged 
to the Duke of Gloucester, the only son of the late Duke of York, 
He said there was reason to fear that magnanimous jwince would 
reject the offer, but he hoped that if all the people, especially the 
citizens of London, would unite in their solicitations, Richard 
might be persuaded to bear the weighty burden of government, 
which was too heavy for an infant’s shoulders. He therefore 
desired, in his name, and that of the council, they would declare 
their opinion; and here he paused, in expectation of hearing them 
exclaim, “ King Richard! King Richard!” but, to his great 
surprise, an universal silence prevailed. He repeated his harangue 







SIR EDMUND SHAW. 


75 


with some variation, and still they continued mute and melan¬ 
choly. He then expressed his displeasure to the Mayor, who 
told him that the people were not accustomed to be harangued 
by any person but the Recorder, who was the city orator. Thomas 
Fitzwilliams, the personage who filled that office, being desired to 
speak on the same subject, recapitulated all that the Duke had 
said, and concluded with desiring they would answer, positively, 
whether or not they would have the Duke of Gloucester for their 
king. A confused murmur ran through the multitude, and some 
of the Duke's domestics, having insinuated themselves among 
the crowd, cried, “ Long live King Richard ! ” A few burghers, 
who had been previously corrupted, joined in this exclamation; 
and the apprentices and populace who stood at the gate, threw up 
their caps in honour of the Duke of Gloucester. Buckingham, 
commanding silence, told them he was rejoiced to find his pro¬ 
posal met with such universal approbation, and desired they 
would meet him next day at the same time and place, that they 
might go together and present an humble supplication to his 
highness, beseeching him to mount the throne, and govern the 
people as his subjects. 

The citizens were accordingly dismissed for that day. 

Shakspere has pourtrayed, with extraordinary fidelity, such an 
interview as might be supposed to have taken place with Bucking¬ 
ham and Richard, after the former’s address to the crowd:— 

Glo. What say the citizens ? 

Buck. Now by the holy mother of our Lord, 

The citizens are mum, say not a word. 

Glo. Touch’d you the bastardy of Edward’s children ? 

Buck. I did ; with his contract with lady Lucy, 

And his contract by deputy in France : 

The insatiate greediness of his desire, 

And his enforcement of the city wives ; 

His tyranny for trifles ; his own bastardy, 

As being got your father then in France ; 

And his resemblance being not like the duke. 

Withal, I did infer your lineaments, 

Being the right idea of your father, 

Both in your form and nobleness of mind : 


























76 


SIR EDMUND SHAW. 


Laid open all your victories in Scotland, 

Your discipline in war, wisdom in peace, 

Your bounty, virtue, fair humility; 

Indeed, left nothing fitting for your purpose 
Untouched, or slightly handled, in discourse. 

And when my oratory grew toward end, 

I bade them that did love their country’s good 
Cry—“God save Richard, England’s royal king !” 

Glo. And did they so ? 

Buck. No, so God help me, they spake not a word : 

But like dumb statues or breathing stones, 

Star’d at each other, and looked deadly pale, 

Which when I saw I reprehended them ; 

And asked the mayor, what meant this wilful silence : 

His answer was, the people were not used 
To be spoke to but by the recorder. 

Then he was urged to tell my tale again;— 

“ Thus saith the duke, thus hath the duke inferred ; ” 

But nothing spoke in warrant from himself. 

When he had done, some followers of mine own, 

At lower end o’ the hall, hurl’d up their caps, 

And some ten voices cried, “ God save king Richard ! ” 

And thus I took the vantage of those few,— 

“Thanks, gentle Citizens, and friends,” quoth I; 

“,This general applause, and cheerful shout, 

Argues your wisdom, and your love to Richard 
And even here brake off, and came away. 

Glo. What tongueless blocks were they ! Would they not speak? 
Will not the mayor then and his brethren come ? 

Buck. The mayor is here at hand : intend some fear ; 

Be not you spoke with but by mighty suit: 

And look you, get a prayer-book in your hand, 

And stand between two churchmen, good my lord ; 

For on that ground I ’ll make a holy descant: 

On the morrow, Buckingham, with the Mayor, Aldermen, and a 
multitude of the Protector’s adherents, repaired to Baynard’s Castle,* 

* This castle, which gives name to one of the wards of the City, stood 
on the banks of the Thames, and was originally built by one Baynard, a 
soldier of fortune, who came over with William the Conqueror. The old 
castle was destroyed by fire, in 1428, after which it was rebuilt by Hum¬ 
phrey, Duke of Gloucester. At his decease, Henry the Sixth gave it to 
Richard, Duke of York, who resided here, with his armed followers, to 
the number of 500, during the important convention of the great men of 
the nation, in 1458, the fore-runner of the civil wars, of which a faint view 
is afforded in the text. Besides having been the residence of Richard the 
third, his vanquisher Henry the Seventh, made it also the place of his 
occasional sojourn. 























SIB EDMUND SHAW. 


77 


where he resided, in order to present an address, in the name of 
the three estates, declaring the bastardy of Edward’s children; 
and entreating him to assume the crown, which was his true 
inheritance. Richard pretended to be terrified at such a concourse 
of people, as if he had thought they came with some sinister 
design upon his person; and when at length Buckingham 
prevailed upon him to give them audience, he came forth with all 
the marks of terror and distrust. He affected great surprise at 
their proposal, which he declined, observing, that he loved his 
brother’s children above all the crowns in the world: though he 
considered their address as a proof of their affection, which he 
should never forget. He exhorted them to live quietly under the 
sovereign to whom they owed their allegiance, and he promised 
for himself, that he would, to the best of his power, advise his 
nephew to govern in such a manner as to render his people 
flourishing and happy. The Duke of Buckingham, appearing 
very much dissatisfied with this answer, declared that the people 
were unanimously resolved, that none of Edward’s children should 
sit upon the throne ; and that, if he would not receive the crown, 
they should be obliged to offer it to some other person. This 
declaration softened the Protector into compliance. He told 
them, that since they were determined to reject the children of 
Edward, he was contented to accept the crown, which was 
undoubtedly his lawful inheritance, though he received it with 
more pleasure as the free gift of a free people. This condescen¬ 
sion in Richard was applauded with loud acclamations. Next 
day, he repaired to Westminster Hall, where, placing himself in 
the royal seat, he made a speech to the audience, and gave the 
judges strict charge for the due administration of justice. 

The coronation of the new monarch, under the title of Richard 
the Third, took place in the course of a brief space. At this 
ceremony the subject of our notice acted as cup-bearer, and took 
a very prominent part in the after proceedings.' 1 ' 

* The Mayor of Winchester seems also to have claimed the office of 
cup-bearer on this occasion. The following letter to the Duke of orfolk, 
High Steward, will show the anxiety of the Londoners to preserve their 






































78 


SIR EDMUND SHAW. 


During the remainder of his term of office, Shaw showed him¬ 
self as the complete sycophant of Richard. Perhaps, indeed, it 
would have been difficult for an individual placed in the position 
which he occupied, to have comported himself so as to have 
avoided all such disgraceful imputations. 

With respect to the subsequent events of Shaw's life, no 
particulars have descended to us. 

ancient right first exercised by Henry Fitz-Alayne, first Mayor of London, 
at the coronation of Richard I. in 1189. 

To the Right High and Mighty Prince the Duke of Norfolk, Seneschal of England. 

“ Shewen under your good and gracious lordship, the mair and citezeins 
of the citee of London, that where, after the liberty and commendable 
customes of the said citee, of time that no man’s mind is to the contrary, 
used, enjoyed, and accustomed, the mair of the said citee for the time 
being, by reason of the office of mairalty of the said citee, in his own 
person, oweth of right and duty to serve the kyng our souvereign lord in 
the day of his ful noble coronation, in such place as it shall please his 
highness to take his spices, and the same cup, with the kevering belonging 
thereunto, and a layer (ewer) of gold, the said mair to have, and with 
him to bear away at the time of his departing, for his fee and reward. 

“ And also that divers other citezeins, that by the said mair and citee 
shal thereto be named and chosen, owen of right by the same custom, at 
the same day to serve in the office of butlership, in helping of the chief 
butler of England, to the lords and estates that shall be at the said coro¬ 
nation, as well at the table in the hall at meat, as after meat in the 
chamber. 

“ Beseeching your said lordship, that Edmund Shaa, now mair, and other 
citezeins of the citee aforesaid, to the said office and service now chosen, 
whose names, in a schedule hereunto annexed, be specified, may be 
admitted to do the same service, as their predecessors, mairs, and citezeins 
of the said citee, in case semblable, have used in days past 

“ Also the said mair and citezeins praying, that they may sit, in the day 
of the said coronation, at the table next the cupboard, of the left side of 
the hall, lykes as of late tyme it hath been used and accustomed; and 
that the said mair may have and enjoy the said fee and reward, according 
to the dutie.” 

Which privilege was confirmed, by admitting the mayor and citizens to 
officiate at the coronation, according to their ancient rights and im¬ 
munities. 

The names of the citizens nominated by the common-council on this 
occasion to represent the city, were, Henry Cole, goldsmith ; John Tote, 
mercer ; William Sandes, grocer; William Sparke, clothworker ; John 
Swane, cissor, i. e. taylor; Thomas Ostriche, haberdasher; William 
Mariner, salter; Richard Knight, fishmonger; John Pasmer, pillipar, 
i. e. skinner; Thomas Bretayn, ironmonger; and Roger Ford, vintner. 






SIR EDMUND SHAW. 


79 


Wearied with the cruelties of the usurper, the nobles of the 
country plotted his destruction, and after allowing him possession 
of the throne for the space of two years, invited over Henry, 
Lari of Richmond, to try his fortune in the field, against Richard. 
T. he head of this confederation was the Duke of Buckingham, 
who had raised Richard to power, but who, being disappointed 
in his expectations of reward, now evinced in his opposition as 
much zeal as he had done formerly in his support. Being 
seized, however, he was put to death, when the issue was just 
at hand. 

The fate of England was decided on the 22nd of August, 
1485, on the field of Bosworth, in Leicestershire. 

There are sounds of trumpets, and warlike instruments, the 
neighing of steeds, wild outcries, a “ confused noise, and gar¬ 
ments rolled in blood:’’ and men are swept by the sword from 
the face of that earth, which must otherwise, in the common 
course of events have been closed over them in a few short 
years. Here came the intrepid Richard, in the thirty-third 
year of his age, a veteran, and, hitherto, a conqueror. When a 
youth of eighteen, he had commanded the whole van of King 
Edward’s army, at the battle of Barnet, against the renowned 
Earl of Warwick, and bore down all before him ; two of his 
squires being killed on that day, fighting by his side. Here, to 
oppose him came the Earl of Richmond, utterly ignorant of the 
art of war, and, till the previous month, a wandering outcast, in 
a foreign land, which he left to engage in his desperate under¬ 
taking, with an armament so wretched and contemptible, as to 
excite no other feelings in the spectators than pity and derision. 

Within the previous thirty years, twelve battles had been 
fought between the factions of York and Lancaster, in which 
more than one hundred thousand English perished by the hands 
of their fellow-countrymen. Here, then, it was decreed, that 
the last of these unnatural and sanguinary conflicts should take 
place. Awhile, it raged with fury, and victory seemed uncertain, 
there was a swaying to and fro, among the warriors, as either 
party seemed for an instant to acquire the advantage. Anon, 







80 


STR EDMUND SITAW. 


there came a whisper of treachery, and movements of doubtful 
import took place. Then a shout arose, and they pointed to 
where Richmond stood, in the midst of his steel clad array. 

It was the first time that Richard had beheld his antagonist. 
His dauntless heart swelled within him at the sight, and his eyes 
flashed as those of the hungry lion, thirsting for the blood of his 
prey. Brief was the pause. “ Let true knights follow !” he ex¬ 
claimed, “ or I alone will try the eventand, with an impetuo¬ 
sity like that of the wild boar, which animal he had chosen for 
his crest, he rushed amid the thickest of his foes. With the 
rapidity of lightning, his sword struck down Sir William Bran¬ 
don, the standard-bearer, and his arm had hurled the proud 
ensign of his enemy to the earth. If valour might atone for 
crime, the memory of Richard would be spotless. Onward he 
pressed, and the brave fell before and around him. A firmer 
heart than Henry possessed, might have quailed at such a 
moment. It is said that he retreated, while the unfortunate king 
after performing “ more wonders than a man,” was hemmed 
round by a multitude, and fell covered with wounds. 

Thus, after a brief struggle of less than two hours, ended the 
battle of Bosworth Field, and with it terminated the long-con¬ 
tested and bloody strife between the rival roses. 

On the 28th of August, 1485, the magistrates of London, in 
their scarlet robes, accompanied by the chief citizens, met the 
new king, Henry the Seventh, at Highgate ; when having con¬ 
ducted his majesty to St. Paul’s, he paid his devotions, and 
retired to Lambeth Palace. 

This year the privileges of the citizens were menaced by their 
own magistrates in a very extraordinary act of common council, 
which enjoined them under the penalty of a hundred pounds, 
not to carry any goods or merchandize to any fair or market 
within the kingdom for seven years. This, however, was 
so highly resented by the legislature, that the next year it was 
repealed in parliament; and the citizens were empowered to 
carry on their commerce as usual, with the penalty of forty pounds 
upon any one who should molest them in their trade. 











































EDMUND SHAW. 


81 


The year following the mayoralty of Shaw, namely, 1484, 
London was desolated by a plague. So virulent was the disease 
in its course, that the brief space of twenty-four hours was suffi¬ 
cient to bring it to its crisis. Of this dreadful malady two 
lords mayors died successively, during their respective terms of 
office: Thomas Hill, who had been the colleague of Shaw in the 
shrievalty in the year 1475, and John Stocher, who had been 
elected on Hill’s decease. One of the sheriffs also was cut off, 
besides a great number of the wealthiest and most influential 
citizens. 


« 


G 































ROBERT FABYAN. 


82 


ROBERT FABYAN, 


(alderman.) 

The history of Robert Fabyan, author of the celebrated work 
entitled “ The New Chronicles of England and France,” presents 
us with the rare instance of a citizen and merchant, in the 
fifteenth century, devoting himself to the pleasures of literature. 
Perhaps, indeed, the redoubted father of English travellers, Sir 
John Mandeville, who speaketh of the “ wayes of the Holy Land 
towarde Jerusalem, and of the Maruyles of Ynde, and of other 
dyverse countries,” is the only parallel to Fabyan whom we find 
in the history of adventurous enterprise. The one leaves his 
native land to traverse and explore the sacred scenes of Palestine, 
not indeed from any of that chivalrous feeling of indignation 
against the followers of Mahomet, which led the devotees of 
crusading fanaticism so far from home, but to identify with Gos¬ 
pel narrative the actual reality of existing circumstance : the 
other bids adieu to ledgers and day-books, and devotes himself 
to the composition of a work, which, for ingenuity and research, 
owns no superior in the republic of letters. 

Of the personal history of Fabyan but few notices have reached 
us. There was nothing remarkable in his descent, and, except 
that he faithfully discharged the duties appertaining to him as an 
Alderman of the City of London, it does not appear that he made 
much figure in public life. He belonged to the Worshipful Com¬ 
pany of Drapers. From his will, it appears that his father’s name 
was John Fabyan ; and there is reason to believe that his family 












ROBERT FAB Y AN. 


83 


were people of substantial respectability in Essex. Stephen 
Fabyan, one of his ancestors, held considerable property at Hal- 
sted, in 1404, and afterwards became possessed of the manor of 
Jenkins. Several branches of the family were also settled at 
Coggeshall. 

Bishop Tanner, in his elaborate work “Bibliotheca Britannico 
Hibernica,” says he was born in London. At what period he 
became a member of the Drapers’ Company cannot now be ascer¬ 
tained. Their registers would probably have furnished a clue to 
guess at the exact time of his birth, but the hall of that respect¬ 
able body has been twice destroyed by fire, and they have no 
documents which reach beyond the year 1602. From records in 
the City archives, however, it appears he was Alderman of Far- 
ringdon Without: in 1493, he served the office of Sheriff: and 
in the registers which go by the name of the “ Repertory,” a few 
scattered memoranda are preserved of the part which he occa¬ 
sionally took, at a period somewhat later, in public transactions. 
On the 20th of September, 1496, in the mayoralty of Sir Henry 
Colet, we find him “ assigned and chosen,” with Mr. Recorder, 
and certain commoners, to ride to the King, “ for redress of the 
new impositions raised and levied upon English cloths in the 
Archduke’s land.” This probably alludes to the circumstance of 
Phillip, to whom the Emperor Maximilian had resigned the Low 
Countries the year before, exacting the duty of a florin upon every 
piece of English cloth imported into his dominions, but from 
which he desisted in the articles of agreement signed by his 
ambassadors in London, July 7th, 1497. 

In 1498, the thirteenth year of Henry the Seventh's reign, we find 
him an assessor upon the different wards of London, of the fifteenth 
which had been granted to the king for the Scottish war. In 1502, 
on the pretext of poverty, he resigned the Alderman’s gown, not 
wishing to take the Mayoralty ; and probably retired to the mansion 
mentioned in his will. That he was opulent at this period can¬ 
not be doubted, but he seems to have considered that the expences 
of the chief magistracy were too great, even at that time, to be 
sustained by a man who had a numerous family, lie orders 


















































84 


ROBERT FABYAN. 


the figures recorded in his will, of sixteen children in brass, to be 
placed upon his monument. Stowe in his “ Survey of London, 
gives the English part of the epitaph on Fabyan’s tomb, from the 
church of St. Michael, Cornhill,"and says he died in 1511, adding 
that his monument was gone. Bale,“who places Fabyan’s death 
on February 28th, 1512, is probably nearest to the truth, as his 
will, though dated July 11th, 1511, was not proved till July 12th 
1513, which, according to the ecclesiastical computation, would be 
somewhat less than five months after the supposed time of his 
death. 

The “ New" Chronicles of England and France,” which has 
down the name of Fabyan to modern times, is regarded by the 
historian as the most credible of the early historical works pro¬ 
duced in this country. 

From several passages in his history, it is evident Fabyan was 
conversant in French, and no layman of the age is said to have 
been more skilled in the Latin language. With these accomplish¬ 
ments, with great opportunities, and with a taste for poetry, he 
endeavoured to reconcile the discordant testimonies of historians ; 
adding the fruits of personal observation in the latter and more 
interesting portion of his “ Chronicle.” His poetry, indeed, is not 
of a superior cast. Mr. Warton, in his “History of English Poetry.” 
considered the “ Complaint of King Edward the Second ” to be the 
best of his metres ; but observes that it is a translation from a 
Latin poem attributed to that monarch, but probably written by 
William of Wyncestre. “ Our author’s transitions,” he adds, “from 
prose to verse in the course of a prolix narrative, seem to be made 
with much ease, and when he begins to versify, the historian 
disappears only by the addition of rhyme and stanza.” Fabyan, 
like the old chroniclers in general, for fear of neglecting some 
important facts, went beyond the age of historical certainty in his 
details. He divides his “Chronicles” into seven portions, giving 
a copy of verses as an epilogue to each, under the title of “ The 
Seven Joys of the Blessed Virgin,” the first six portions being his 
history from the landing of Brutus to the Norman Conquest. 




































ROBERT FABYAN. 85 

The seventh extends from the Norman Conquest to his own 
time. 

Our author in ascribing the foundation of Britain to Brutus, 
follows that most fabulous old chronicler, Geoffrey of Monmouth.- 
According to this worthy, Brutus, a lineal descendant of iEneas, 
son of the Trojan King, Priam, and grandson of Jupiter by his 
daughter Venus, landed about the year of the world 2859 (or 
1008 years before the nativity of Christ,) in the neighbourhood of 
the spot where the town of Plymouth now stands, and gave our 
island the name of Britain, instead of Albion, by which it had 
been previously distinguished. Four years afterwards, Brutus 
built the City of London, calling it Troy-novant, (new Troy) or 
Trino van turn. This tale, although in the words of Stowe, “It 
bee not of sufficient force to drawe the gayne-sayejs,” was 
formerly esteemed of great validity by our ancestors; so high 
especially, was the credit of the latter part of it, that in a memo¬ 
rial presented to Henry the Sixth, in the early part of his reign, 
and now preserved among the records in the Tower, it is advanced 
as evidence of the “ great antiquity, precedency, and dignity of 
the City of London, even before Rome.” 

That Fabyan was a little tinged with superstition must be allowed ; 
but he was no great favourer of the monastic institutions. His 
observations on some of the miracles related in his history are too 
pointed to be mistaken. On the preservation of the holy oil at 
Rheims from the time of St. Remegius, he remarks: “ To this 
report every man may give credence as hym lyketh. For I fand 
not this wryten in the Gospell, nor yet in no booke of Holy Scrip¬ 
ture.” He makes a similar observation on the supposed vision of 
Richard, the third Duke of Normandy, adding, that “ Antonius, 
archbishop of Florence, when he reherseth anything like narrations 
which he thinketh somewhat doubtfull, he joyneth these words, 
and saith pium est credere .” In another place, he says at once, 
“ which is for folys (fools) to believe.” Nor is he backward in 
pointing out the partiality of Robert Gaguin (the author whom he 
principally follows in the French history) to his native country. 
A manuscript of the second volume of Fabyan’s “Chronicles” is 















86 


llOBFUT FABYAN. 


preserved in the library which formerly belonged to Sir Robert 
Cotton, now in the British Museum. It wants unfortunately 
several leaves towards the close, but is supposed to have originally 
been continued lower than the first printed’ copy. Stowe, in the 
collections which he made for his “Survey,” speaks of a continua¬ 
tion by Fabyan himself, as low as the third year of Henry the 
Eighth; “which boke, (he adds) I have in writin hand.” It is not 
improbable that it might have gone from Stowe’s collection to that 
of Sir Robert Cotton. Two other manuscripts are said to be in 
existence: one in a private library in Warwickshire, and another 
in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. 

This work was not printed during the lifetime of the author. 
The first edition was published by Pynson, in the year 1516, and 
appears to have been edited by that individual himself. Instead 
of a title it gives the arms of Henry the Eighth, crowned, sus¬ 
tained from below by a dragon and a greyhound. Above the 
crown is a rose supported by angels with scrolls. That on 
the left bears these words : Nase rosa Virtutes de Caelo missa 
sereno. That on the right: Eternum jlorens regia sceptra feret. 
The same device is repeated on the other side of the leaf, and 
again at the beginning of the second volume. The work through¬ 
out is adorned with prints of an exceedingly rude kind, but at 
least equal to those of that day. Brutus is habited in plated 
armour of the fifteenth century; and two wooden blocks, one 
looking to the right, the other to the left, appear to have pro¬ 
duced all the portraits of all the kings both of England and 
France. The great rarity of this first edition is in part accounted 
for by Bishop Bale, the celebrated antiquarian, who in the second 
edition of his work “ On the Celebrated Writers of England and 
Scotland,” subjoins the following anecdote to the account of 
Fabyan:—Ejus Cronicorum exemplaria nonulla Cardinalis Wol- 
sias in sue furore comburi fecit: quod cleri proventus purgues 
plus satis detexerit.” Cardinal Wolsey, in his rage, caused every 
copy of his “ Chronicles” to be burned, because he had un¬ 
sparingly exposed the intentions of that worthy. 

The obnoxious part of the “ Chronicles” here mentioned must 







































ROBERT FABYAN. 


87 


have been the abstract of the Bill projected by the House of Com¬ 
mons, in the eleventh year of Henry the Fourth, for depriving 
the ecclesiastics of their temporal possessions. Bale’s assertion 
is unsupported by any other writer. It is certain, however, that 
the second edition did not appear till after the Cardinal’s death. 

The following is the title of the first volume of the second 
edition:— 

“Fabyan’s Chronycle; newly prynted, wyth the Chronycles, 
Actes, and Dedes done in the tyme of the reyne of the moste ex¬ 
cellent Prynce Kynge Henry the VII., father unto our most drad 
Souerayne Lord, Kyng Henry the VIII., to whom be all honour, 
reuere’ce and joyfull contynaunce of his prosperous reygne, to the 
pleasure of God and weale of his realme. Prenty’d at London, 
by Wyllyam Rastell, 1533. Cum Privilegio.”* 

In this edition the text of Pynson was principally followed, 
though with occasional variations; and one year (the twenty- 
fourth of Henry the Sixth,) entirely omitted, as well as the singular 
passage which asserts Edmund Crouchback to have been the eldest 
son of King Henry the Third. 

The title prefixed to the second volume is as follows:— 

“The Second Volume of Fabyan’s Chronycle, conteyning the 
Chronycles of England and of Fraunce, from the begynning of the 
reygne of our most redoubted Souerayne Lord, Kynge Henry the 
VIII. Prenty’d at London, by Wyllyam Rastell, 1533. Cum 
Privilegio.” 

In 1542 appeared the third edition, with this title:—“The Chro¬ 
nycle of Fabyan, whiche he himselfe nameth ‘ Ye concordance of 
Hystoryes,’ nowe newly printed, and in many cases corrected, as 
to ye dylygent reader it may apere. 1542. Cum Privilegio ad 

* Rastell was the nephew of Henry the Eighth’s Lord Chancellor, Sir 
Thomas More, and editor of the English works of his illustrious relative, 
he was the most celebrated printer of his time, and works with his name 
attached, are distinguished for their accuracy, and beauty of typography. 
In the reign of Edward the Sixth, in common with many others, he was 
driven abroad by religious persecution ; but in the first year of the reign of 
Mary, the persecution having changed sides, he returned to his native 
country. 


t 


\ 








88 


ROBERT FABYAN. 


impromendum solum. Printed for John Keynes, dwellynge at ye 
sygne of ye Saynte George, in Paul’s Churche Yarde.” 

The title prefixed to the second volume was, “ The Seconde 
Volume of Fabyan’s Chronycle, conteynynge ye Chronycles of 
England and of Fraunce, from ye begynnynge of ye Reygne of 
Kynge Richarde ye fyrste, untyll ye xxxii. yere of ye reygne of 
oure moste redoubted Sovereygne Lorde, Kynge Henry ye VIII.” 

The alterations and omissions in this and the subsequent edition 
of 1559, are rather numerous. Within a year after the publication 
of the last edition, in 1533, the Papal authority in England had 
been overthrown, and the very name of Pope not only erased from 
the Service books, but forbidden to be used. The changes of the 
times gave but little hope of security to any printer, even of an 
old work, if it contained facts or doctrines incompatible with the 
views of Reformation. Among the more conspicuous of the omis¬ 
sions are “ The Seven Joys of the Blessed Virgin,” the verses 
commending the persecution of one Banby or Lollard ; innumera¬ 
ble miracles, particularly where they were taken from the “ Legend 
of Saints,” or attributed to Popes; the envoy at the close of the 
first volume ; the whole of the twenty-eighth year of Henry III.; 
all such passages as tended to encourage houses of religion, 
penance, pilgrimage, or the preservation of relics; and whatever 
related to offences done to the Church of Rome, the shrines of 
saints, the rejected sacraments, the burning of tapers, or the mass. 

Nor must the omission of such passages be forgotten, in which 
any king, whether of England or France, is described as an “Enemy 
to holy religious places.” Henry the Second is no longer called 
the honour of the Holy Church nor have we any notice of the 
acceptance of Hugh, Bishop of Chester, for having expelled the 
monks of Coventry, who “ upon his death-bed axed of God, that, 
for a due and covenant penance, he might redeem that offence, by 
lying in the fire of purgatory, from the day of his death to the 
general day of doom.” But the most remarkable of all the pas¬ 
sages altered or omitted, are those which relate to the struggle 
between Henry the Second, and Archbishop Becket. The latter 
is no longer mentioned as a “ Glorious Martyr” and a “ blessed 






































ROBERT FABYAN. 


89 


saint/’ but as a “ traiterous bishop.” The greater part of his 
history is silently omitted, and the rest accommodated to the 
changes which had taken place in religion. Among the more 
minute alterations, the words “holy” and “blessed” are but rarely 
bestowed on saints and martyrs. In one place for “ martyred, ” 
we have murdered; and in another, “shewing that many virtues 
have been rehearsed of the holy Virgin Edyth,” we have versus. 
The word “Pope,” is uniformly changed to Bishop of Rome; and 
notes are occasionally inserted, not only against the Papal authority, 
but against the “readiness, wretchedness, and ambition,” with 
which it was exerted. 

With respect to the occurrences worthy of note in the City of 
London, Fabyan is generally very minute and graphic. Under 
the fifty-third year of Henry the Third, anno 1269, he 
gives the following relation of a violent affray between the 
Goldsmiths’ and Tailors’ Companies :—“ In this liii. yere in ye 
moneth of November fyll a varyaunce atwene the felysshyppes of 
Goldsmythes and Tayloures of London, whiche grewe to 
makynge of parties, so that with the Goldsmythes take partie the 

felysshep or craft of -, and with the Tayloures held ye craft 

of Stayners ; by meane of this moche people nyghtly gaderyd in 
the stretes in harneys, and at length, as it were prouyded, the 
thirde nyght of the sayd parties mette vpon the nombre of V.C. 
men on both sydes, and ran togyder, with such vyolence, that 
some were slayne, and many wonded. Then outcry was made, 
so that ye shyreffes, with strengthe of other comers, came to the 
ryddynge of theym, and of theym toke certayne persones, and 
sent theym vnto dyvers prysons; and upon the morrowe, such 
serche was made, yt the moste of the chief causers of that fray 
were taken and put in warde. Then vpon the Fry day folowynge 
saynt Katteryns daye, sessyons were kepte at Newgate by the 
Mayre and Lawrence de Broke iustice and other: where xxx. of 
the sayd persones were arregned of felony, and xiii. of theym 
caste and hanged: and for one Godfrey de Benyrley holpe to 
arme one of the sayde persones, he was also caste amonge the 
others.” This contention between the companies lasted many 









90 ROBERT FABYAN. 

years, nor was it finally terminated till several persons of each 
party were expelled from the city. 

Fabyan has been quoted by different historians, namely, Strype, 
Maitland, and Malcolm, as noticing London stone, in the dog- 
grel rhymes which he has attached, by way of prologue, to the 
second volume of his “ Chronicle yet, on referring to the 
original, it will be evident that London only was intended to be 
described. Rome, Carthage, and Jerusalem, says Fabyan, have 
been ‘ caste downe,’ with ‘ many other cytyes,’ yet 

“ Thys, so oldely founded, 

Is so surely grounded, 

That no man can confounde yt, 

It is so sure a stone. 

That yt is upon sette, 

For though some have it thrette, 

With manasses, grym and great, 

Yt hurte had yt none : 

Chryst is the very Stone, 

That the Citie is set upon : 

Which from all hys foon, 

Hath ever preserved it. 

By meane of dyvyne servyce, 

That in contynuall wyse 
Is kept in devout guyse, 

Within the mure of yt.” 

The best edition of Fabyan’s “Chronicles,” is that published in 
1812, and edited by the present principal librarian to the British 
Museum, Sir Henry Ellis. 

During the early part of his reign, Henry the Seventh seems to 
have been in great favour with the Londoners. In 1487, when 
he returned with his queen from the defeat of Lambert Simnel, 
they met him at Highgate, and conducted him to hear Te 
Deurn at Saint Paul’s; and in 1488, when he applied to them 
for a loan of four thousand pounds, they not only advanced it 
with the greatest cheerfulness, but lent him, soon afterward, two 
thousand more. 

During this year, the complaint which occurs in the rolls of 






ROBERT FABYAX. 


91 


parliament, both in the reigns of Richard the Second and Henry 
the Sixth, concerning the offensive slaughterhouses in the neigh¬ 
bourhood of Newgate-street, was renewed ; and it was ordained 
that no butcher should kill any ox or cow, within the walls of 
London, under the penalty of one shilling for each offence, as 
well as eight-pence for every other beast. The reason of the 
application seems to have been that the citizens of London con¬ 
sidered the stench occasioned by the putrid blood and entrails, 
which were thrown into the channels of the street connected 
with the Fleet river, as a great encouragement to the dissemina¬ 
tion of the plague. 

In 1492, Henry’s parliament, for the prosecution of the war 
with France, raised money by way of benevolence; when the 
wealthier of the inhabitants of London were assessed by the 
commissioners discretionally, and, including two hundred pounds 
each paid by the aldermen, raised a sum but little short of fifteen 
thousand pounds. 

The king, it appears, was still anxious to retain their good 
opinion : on the twelfth day, 1494, he entertained the mayor, 
aldermen, and principal commoners at Westminster, with unusual 
grandeur; and detained them among the pleasures of the table 
almost till the breaking of the following day. But the advice of 
his court favorites, unluckily coinciding with his avaricious tem¬ 
per, led him soon afterward to acts of oppression which gradually 
lost him their affection. He resolved to raise money, which he 
did not want, by forfeitures upon penal laws, and began his exac¬ 
tions with Sir William Capel, one of the aldermen, who was 
condemned to pay a fine of £2700, but by great intercession pro¬ 
cured its remission to £1600. 

London, however, still continued faithful to its allegiance, and 
in 1497, when the Cornish men, who had even reached Blackheath 
endeavoured to excite a general revolt, the citizens not only 
erected batteries for the defence of the metropolis, but showed 
every disposition of attachment to the royal cause. 

But Henry, much as he still expressed a kindness for the Lon¬ 
doners, looked upon them as a mine whence sums of enormous 







92 ROBERT FABYAN. 

magnitude might be occasionally drawn. In 1503, he obtained 
five thousand pounds for the confirmation of the city liberties, 
and four years afterward suffered Empson and Dudley, his chief 
favorites, to oppress some of the richer citizens, by the most cruel 
acts of rapacity and violence. They were accused of imaginary 
crimes committed in their offices, dragged to the Marshalsea, and 
confined without any legal process till they had redeemed them¬ 
selves by large sums of money. The same fate it appears would 
have befallen others, had not Henry’s death supervened.* 

* Vide “Chronicles of the Mayoralty and Shrievalty,” at the close of 
the volume. 










STR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 93 


SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ, 

(LORD MAYOR). 


SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ, whose name has been handed 
down to modern times in connection with several of the most 
remarkable events of the two concluding decades of the fifteenth, 
and the earlier years of the sixteenth centuries, was an individual 
of high distinction and importance in the City of London at the 
period alluded to. He was a member of the Goldsmiths’ Com¬ 
pany, and at his death made a bequest of a large amount of 
money to its funds. 

We find him serving the office of Sheriff in the year 1498, 
during the mayoralty of John Percival. In the year 1502 he was 
himself elected to the civic chair which he filled with the highest 
honor to himself and benefit to his fellow citizens. The inaugu¬ 
ration dinner, said to have been given in the Goldsmiths’ Hall by 
Lord Mayor Read on his accession to office, was attended by 
upwards of a hundred persons of the highest rank in the king¬ 
dom. With respect to the circumstance of this sumptuous 
ceremony having taken place in the hall just mentioned, Stow 
insinuates a doubt as to the truth of the assertion:—“The Gold¬ 
smiths’ Hall, a proper house but not large, and therefore to say 
that Bartholomew Read, goldsmith, Mayor in the year 1502, 
kept such a feast in this hall as some have fabled, is far incre¬ 
dible, and altogether impossible considering the smallness of the 
hall and number of the guests, which, as they say, were more 
than a hundred persons of great estate. For the messes and 
dishes of meats to them served, the paled park in the same hall 







94 SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 

furnished with fruitful trees, beasts of venery, and other circum¬ 
stances of that pretended feast, well weighed, Westminster Hall 
would hardly have sufficed, and therefore I will overpass it.” 

Perhaps Stow is correct in his insinuation that the inaugura¬ 
tion feast of Read could not have taken place in Goldsmiths’ 
Hall, since it contained no apartment spacious enough for the 
accommodation of such a company of guests, though his argu¬ 
ment against the truth of the report concerning the magnificence 
of the feast falls to the ground.* 1 Looking at the circumstances 
of the case it is indeed improbable that the Goldsmiths’ Hall was 
so highly honoured on this important occasion, for we find that 
Bartholomew Read only a short time previous to his accession to 
office purchased Crosby House in Bishopsgate-street, in order 
that he might have a home befitting the splendour which he had 
determined should signalize his mayoralty. 

During the year, Read had the honour to entertain and lodge 
at Crosby House an embassy, sent into England by Maxamilian, 
Emperor of Germany, on the occasion of the deaths of the Queen 
of Henry VII, (Elizabeth of York), and her son, Prince Arthur, 
which had taken place within a few months of each other. The 
embassy consisted of the Lord Casimir, the Marquis of Branden¬ 
burg, his cousin, accompanied with a Bishop, an Earl, and a 
great number of gentlemen, well apparelled. It was sent for 
three reasons; one to visit and comfort the King, being mournful 
and sad for the death of so good a Queen and spouse; the second, 
for the renovation of the old league and amity; the third, which 
was not apparent, was to move the King to marry the Emperor’s 
daughter, the Lady Margaret, Duchess Dowager of Savoy. The 
first two objects succeeded ; the latter failed. 

Hitherto the History of London has been occasionally varied 
by the introduction of the habits and manners which prevailed 

* The present hall of the Goldsmiths’ Company, in Foster-lane, stands 
on the site of the edifice alluded to in the text. It had been founded for 
the use of the Company in 1407, by Sir Drewe Barentyne, Lord Mayor in 
1398. It was destroyed in the great fire, September 1666, and the building 
that arose in its place a few years afterwards was only removed to make 
room for the present magnificent edifice. 







SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 95 

at different periods ; but perhaps no reign of English history 
tends to place the customs of its inhabitants in a stronger point 
of view, or to exhibit the difference between the past times and 
the present with more effect, than that of Henry the Eighth. 

On the day he was proclaimed he retired to the tower, not 
only that he might avoid the tumultuary acclamations of the 
people, but to enjoy leisure to attend to business; and one of his 
first proclamations gained him great popularity among the Lon¬ 
doners, as it invited all, who had been injured by the too rigor¬ 
ous enforcement of antiquated penal laws in the late reign, to lay 
their complaints before certain commissioners, appointed not 
merely to hear but to redress their wrongs ; while Empson and 
Dudley, the detested instruments of the vexatious prosecutions, 
were committed close prisoners to the tower. 

At his coronation, on the 23rd of June 1609, the procession 
from the Tower, was remarkably magnificent; and a slight 
sketch of it will exhibit a picture of ancient costume — 
Henry himself was clothed in the richest manner; his coat was 
embossed or raised with gold, and the placards covered with dia¬ 
monds, rubies, emeralds and pearls, and the bawdrick on his neck 
with balasses ; while from his shoulders flowed a robe of crimson 
velvet furred with ermine. The trappings of his courser were of 
damask, embroidered with gold and edged with an ermine border. 
His attendant knights and esquires were in habits of crimson 
velvet; and the gentlemen and others of his chapel, with the 
officers of the household and servants, in scarlet. 

When the cavalcade proceeded from the fortress, five barons of 
the cinque ports approached the king, and held over his head a 
canopy of state ; and two persons rode before him, who repre¬ 
sented the dutchies of Guienne and Normandy. The gentlemen 
who carried his cloak and hat were almost covered with embroid¬ 
ery ; and their horses richly adorned with burnished silver, over 
which were thrown nettings of green silk and twist of gold, 
fringed with gold and damask. Sir Thomas Brandon, master of 
the horse, was habited in tissue embroidery with golden roses : 
he led the king’s horse by a silken rein, whose harness and saddle 








96 SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 

were studded, in the expression of the record, with “ bullion gold, 
barr’d-wise.” Nine children in blue velvet, embroidered with 
golden fleurs de lis, rode on coursers, whose trappings were re¬ 
spectively adorned with the royal titles of England, France, Gas¬ 
coigne, Guienne, Normandy, Anjou, Cornwall, Wales, and Ire¬ 
land ; and over the robes of each hung a chain of gold. The 
queen’s retinue of lords, knights, and esquires, were equally 
splendid in their apparel. Her majesty, clothed in white satin 
embroidered, with her hair flowing down her back, and a rich 
coronet upon her head, was seated in a chariot drawn by two 
white palfreys, with trappings of white and gold. And six per¬ 
sons of honour in white cloth of gold, with many ladies in chariots, 
closed the train. 

To render the pomp of this procession more conspicuous, the 
streets through which it passed were railed, barred, and swept; 
the generality of the houses were hung with tapestry and arras, 
and the greater part of those on the south side of Cheapside 
covered with gold brocade. The companies of the city were ar¬ 
ranged on stages from Gracechurch westward; and the goldsmiths 
had virgins clad in white placed before them, bearing branches 
with burning tapers ; while numbers of priests, in the richest vest¬ 
ments of the altar, lined the way, some bearing crosses, and others 
censing the royal pair with silver censers. 

Henry took considerable pains to rivet the attention of the Lon¬ 
doners, and the next year, by a stretch of authority, then not 
unfrequently encouraged, sacrificed the rapacious ministers of his 
father, to the resentment of the citizens, while their meaner in¬ 
struments were pilloried, and led on horseback, with papers on 
their heads, through the city. 

The city watch was then a military force of a peculiar kind, 
consisting of substantial citizens, with a magistrate of some dig¬ 
nity at their head, in every ward: twice a year, on the vigils of 
St. John Baptist and St. Peter and St. Paul, they had a solemn 
march: to see which, on the first of these, in 1510, the young 
king came incog, in the habit of a Yeoman of the Guard, and 
was so highly delighted with the sight, that he returned on the 





SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 97 

eve of St. Peter, accompanied by his royal consort, and the prin¬ 
cipal nobility, and stopped at Mercer's Hall, Cheapside, to see the 
procession repeated. The march was begun by the city music, 
followed by the Lord Mayor’s officers in party-coloured liveries, 
then the sword-bearer on horseback, clothed in armour, preceding 
the Lord Mayor, who was mounted on a stately horse, adorned 
with rich trappings, attended by a giant, and two pages on horse¬ 
back ; three pageants, morris dancers, and footmen. Next came 
the Sheriffs, preceded by their officers, and attended in like man¬ 
ner with the Mayor; then came a great body of demi-lancers, in 
bright armour, mounted, with the city arms upon their backs and 
breasts ; a company of archers, with their bows bent, and sheaves 
of arrows by their sides, with pikemen, and halberdiers in cors¬ 
lets and helmets, and a large body of bill-men, wearing helmets 
and aprons of mail, closed the procession. The whole body, 
■which consisted of about two thousand men, had between every 
division, a certain number of musicians, who were answered in 
their proper places, by the like number of drums, with standards 
and ensigns. This nocturnal march was lighted by nine hundred 
and forty cressets, which were large lanterns, fixed at the end of 
poles, and carried over men's shoulders, two hundred of which 
were furnished at the expense of the city, five hundred by the 
different companies, and the remainder by the city constables. 
The march began at the conduit in Cheapside, passed through 
Cornhill and Leadenhall Street, to Aldgate, and returned by 
Fenchurch and Gracechurch Streets, through Cornhill to Cheap¬ 
side, while along the whole way, the houses were adorned with 
flowers and branches, occasionally interspersed with lamps, 

We have indulged in this digression, in order to afford our 
readers some insight into the civic customs of three centuries 
ago. Richard Niccols, a poet of the sixteenth century, and 
author of a composition entitled “ London’s Artillery,” has the 
following very beautiful lines, descriptive of the bonfires and 

cresset lights of the great festival of the summer solstice. 

“ The wakeful shepherd, by his flock in field, 

With wonder at that time far off beheld, 

The wanton shine of thy triumphant fires, 

Playing upon the tops of thy tall spires.” 

H 







98 SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 

The same poet, still apostrophising London, thus describes the 
imposing solemnity of the scene : 

“ Thy goodly buildings, that ’till then did hide 
Their rich array, opened their windows wide, 

Where kings, great peers, and many a noble dame, 

Whose bright pearl-glittering robes did mock the flame, 

Of the night’s burning lights, did sit to see, 

How every senator, in his degree, 

Adorned with shining gold, and purple weeds, 

And stately mounted on rich trapped steeds, 

Their guard attending, through the streets did ride, 

Before their foot-bands, graced with glittering pride, 

Of rich gilt arms.” 

But, that the reader may the more completely gather from these 
pages a history not only of the individuals whose acts have 
entitled them to the notice of posterity, but likewise of the times 
in which they lived, let us return from this episode to the period 
when Sir Bartholomew Read was a remarkable performer in civic 
affairs. It is a period of extraordinary interest in the history of 
London, both from the social improvements to which it gave 
birth, and from the intolerable oppressions to which the citizens 
were subjected at the hands of the monarch. 

Few princes have been better acquainted with the arts of 
getting money than Henry the Seventh. His insatiable avarice 
converted every thing to profit. Hence the number of charters 
and other grants or confirmations of privileges by him. In 1503, 
the Company of Taylors and Linen Armourers obtained a new 
charter, by which they were re-incorporated under the name of 
Merchant Taylors ; and, though Henry was a member of this 
Company, they were compelled to purchase this favour. 

In 1505, the citizens were obliged to pay five thousand marks 
under pretence of a charter of confirmation of their rights 
and liberties. The principal objects of this charter were to 
restrain the encroachments of foreign merchants on the franchises 
of the citizens, and to regulate the qualifications of brokers. Its 
form was nearly similar to that of the 50th Edward the Third, 
and of 1st Richard the Second confirmed by Parliament. The king 







SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 99 

also obliged the Company of Merchant Adventurers, notwithstand¬ 
ing they were legally recognised by Parliament in the act relating 
to then* freedom fines, to have a new charter of confirmation of their 
privileges, and they are here called, for the first time, by the 
name of “The Fellowship of Merchant Adventurers of England.” 
At the same time the Steel-yard Merchants were prohibited from 
carrying English cloths to the place of residence of the Merchant 
Adventurers in the low countries, and the Aldermen of the Steel¬ 
yard were compelled to enter into a recognizance of two thousand 
marks for the observance of this restriction. 

But of all his artifices to accumulate riches none were more 
iniquitous than those founded upon the vigorous execution of 
obsolete and forgotten penal laws. With this view he employed 
expert lawyers, who searched into these laws, and also innumerable 
spies in all parts of the kingdom, to discover those who had 
transgressed them; and when laws were not found to answer 
his purposes, they were made, with a specious semblance of 
being for the public good, but in reality to increase the revenues 
of the crown. Sir Richard Empson and Edmond Dudley, two 
bold and unfeeling men, were the chief instruments employed 
by Henry in these nefarious transactions. Many, against whom 
accusations could not be supported, were thrown into prison, 
where they were detained without trial, until they were brought 
to offer large compositions for their deliverance; and, such 
as persisted obstinately in refusing to compound, were at length 
brought to trial before commissioners appointed by the king, 
who dispensed with juries and witnesses, and condemned in 
a summary way. An instance of this description is to be found 
in Sir William Capel, Lord Mayor of London; who was fined 
two thousand seven hundred pounds, and after a long struggle, 
and remaining several years in prison, was forced to compound 
for sixteen hundred pounds. Thomas Knesworth, Mayor of 
London, and his two sheriffs, suffered a long imprisonment, and 
at length obtained their deliverance by the payment of one thou¬ 
sand four hundred pounds. Christopher Hawis, Mercer and 
Alderman of London, was so harrassed by these inquisitors, that 











100 


SIR BARTHOLOMEW READ. 


he died of a broken heart. Sir Lawrence Alemore and his two 
Sheriffs were fined a thousand pounds, and committed to prison, 
but obtained their deliverance by the king’s death. 

The king, having amassed considerable wealth by such oppres¬ 
sions, endeavoured to remove the odium of the means employed to 
acquire it, by ostentatious acts of benevolence. Accordingly, we 
find that he endowed several religious foundations, and gave 
considerable alms to the poor; and, in 1507, discharged all the 
prisoners, in London, whose debts did not exceed forty shillings. 







SIR JOHN REST. 


101 


Sill JOHN REST, 

(LORD MAYOR.) 

John Rest, a member of the Company of Mercers, was in 
his day one of the most eminent citizens of the metropolis. 

We find him serving the office of Sheriff, in conjunction with 
John Melbourne (Draper), in the year 1511, during the mayoralty 
of Roger Aichiley. 

In the year 1516, he was raised to the civic chair, and received 
the honour of knighthood from Henry VIII. He kept his 
mayoralty in Crosby Place, which he seems to have taken, in 
order to give due splendour to the occasion. 

The events of Sir John Rest’s mayoralty, were more than 
usually stirring and important, but by far the most remarkable 
was that jwhich has given the name of “ Evil May Day,” to the 
celebration of one of the festive sports of the first of May, 1517. 

May Day, which in the olden times was consecrated both to 
the goddess Flora and the queen of Love, was the grand rustic 
holiday of our forefathers, and it was accustomed to be celebrated 
with joyous diversions and festive revelry. In the early dawn, 
from every town and village, the lads and lasses poured fourth in 
congregated throngs, “to fetch home the May” from the blos¬ 
soming woodlands, a' custom which Spenser thus poetically 
recorded in the fifth eclogue of his “ Shepherd’s Calendar:” 

Youtkes folke now flocken in every where, 

To gather May-buskets and smelling breere ; 

An d home they hasten the postes to dight, 

And all the kirk pillers ere day-light, 

With hawthorne buds, and sweet eglantine, 

And girlonds of roses, and sops in wine. 





























102 


SIR JOHN REST. 


Siker, this morrow, no longer ago, 

I saw a shole of shepherds out-go, 

With singing and showting, and jolly cheere ; 

Before them yode a lusty tabrere, 

That to the meynie a horn-pipe plaid, 

Whereto they dauncen eche one with his maide. 

To see these folkes make such jovisaunce, 

Made my heart after the pipe to daunce. 

Tho’ to the greenwood they speeden them all, 

To fetchen home May with their musicall: 

And home they bringen, in a royal throne, 

Crowned as king, and his queen attone, 

Was Lady Flora, on whom did attend, 

A faire flock of faieries, and a fresh bend 
Of lovely nymphs. Oh, that I were there, 

To helpen the ladies their May-bush beare ! 

So, likewise, the deliciously-warbling Herrick, in a mellifluous 
address to his slumbering Corinna, thus beautifully describes the 
harmless follies of a May morning. 

Get up, get up, for shame, the blooming morne, 

Upon her wings presents the god unshorne. 

See how Aurora throws her faire 
Fresh-quilted colours through the aire, 

Get up, sweet slug-a-bed and see, 

The dew-bespangled herbe and tree. 

Each flower has wept, and bowed toward the east, 

Above an hour since, yet you not drest, 

Nay, not so much as out of bed j 
When all the birds have matteyns seyd, 

And sung their thankfull hymnes ; ’tis sin, 

Nay, profanation, to keep in ; 

When, as a thousand virgins, on this day, 

Spring sooner than the lark to fetch in May. 

Bise, and put on your foliage, and be seen, 

To come forth: like the spring-time, fresh and greene, 

And sweet as Flora. Take no care 
For jewels for your gowne or haire ; 

Fear not, the leaves will strew. 

Gemms in abundance upon you ; 

Besides, the childhood of the day has kept, 

Against you come, some orient pearls unwept. 








SIR JOIIN REST. 


103 


Come, and receive tliem, while the light 
Hangs on the dew-locks of the night; 

And Titan, on the Eastern hill, 

Retires himselfe, or else stands still, 

Till you come forth. Wash, dress, be brief in praying ; 
Few beads are best, when once we goe a Maying. 

Come, my Corinna, come ; and coming, marke, 

How each field turns a street, each street a parke, 

Made green, and trimmed with trees ; see how 
Devotion gives each house a bough, 

Or branch; each porch, each doore, ere this, 
An arke, a tabernacle is, 

Made up of white-thorn, neatly interwove, 

As if here w r ere those cooler shades of love; 

Can such delights be in the street, 

And open fields, and we not see’t ? 

Come, we’ll abroad, and let’s obey 
The proclamation made for May ; 

And sin no more, as we have done, by staying ; 

But, my Corinna, come, let’s goe a Maying. 

There’s not a budding boy or girl this day, 

But is got up, and gone to bring in May. 

A deale of youth, ere this, is come 
Back, and with white-thorn laden home, 

Some have dispatcht their cakes and creame, 
Before that we have left to dreame ; 

And some have wept, and wooed, and plighted troth, 

And chose their priests, ere w'e can cast off sloth ; 

Many a green gowne has been given, 

Many a kisse, both odd and even ; 

Many a glance, too, has been sent, 

From out the eye, love’s firmament; 

Many a jest told of the keye’s betraying, 

This night, and locks pickt, yet we’re not a Maying. 


Come, let us goe, while we are in our prime, 
And take the harmless follie of the time. 

We shall grow old apace, and die, 
Before we know our liberty. 
























104 SIR JOHN REST. 

Our life is short, and our dayes run, 

As fast away as do’s the sunne ; 

And as a vapour, or a drop of raine, 

Once lost, can ne’er be found againe ; 

So, when or you or I are made, 

A fable, song, or fleeting shade ; 

All love, all liking, all delight, 

Lies drowned with us in endless night, 

Then, while time serves, and we are but decaying, 

Come, my Corinna, come, let’s go a Maying. 

But the jocund sports of this festival were not confined to the 
young and gay, even royalty itself partook of its diversions, and, 
as Stowe informs us, “ every man, except impediment, would, in 
May Day in the morning, walke into the sweete meddowes, and 
greene woods, there to rejoice their spirits with the beauty and 
savour of sweet flowers, and with an harmony of birds, praysing 
God in their kind.” 

“ I finde also,” continues our chronicler, “ that in the month of 
May, the citizens of London (of all estates) lightly in every 
parish, or sometimes two or three parishes joining together, had 
their severall Mayings, and did fetch in May-poles, with divers 
war-like showes, with good archers, morice dauncers, and other 
devices for pastime, all the day long, and towards the evening, 
they had stage-plays and bonefiers in the streets. 

Of these Mayings, we read in the reign of Henry the Sixth, 
that the aldermen and sherifies of London, beeing on May Day, 
at the Bishop of London’s Wood, in the parish of Stebunheath, 
(Stepney) and having there a worshipful dinner for themselves 
and other commers, Lydgate, the poet, that was a monke of 
Bury, sent to them by a pursuivant, a joyful commendation of that 
season, containing sixteen staves in meter royal, beginning 
thus:— 

Mighty Flora, goddess of fresh flowers, 

Which clothed hath the soyle in lusty greene, 

Made buds to spring with her sweet showers, 

By influence of the sunne shine, 

To do pleasaunce, of intent full cleane, 

Unto the states which now sit here, 

Hath Yer down sent her own daughter deare 


















SIR JOHN REST. 


105 


Making the vertue that dured in the root, 

Called the vertue, the vertue vegetable, 

For to transcend, most wholesome and most soote, 

Into the top, this season so agreeable, 

The bawmy liquor is so commendable, 

That it rejoiceth with his fresh moisture, 

Man, beast, and fowle, and every creature,” &c. 

In Henry the Eighth’s reign, but more particularly in his early 
years, the May games were celebrated with justes, and splendid 
pageantry, and that far-famed chivalric outlaw, Robin Hood, 
presided as Lord of the May, supported by his boon companions, 
Little John and Friar Tuck, and having his fair maid, Marian, in 
his suite, together with numerous attendant morris-dancers and 
other revellers. Henry’s was, at first, a court of social gaiety, 
and “ pleasaunce,” of which the annals of his day furnish abun¬ 
dant testimony. 

About this time it appears “ a great heart-burning and mali¬ 
cious grudge grew amongst the Englishmen of the City of 
London against strangers; and many of the artificers found them¬ 
selves much aggrieved because such numbers of strangers were 
permitted to resort hither with their wares, and to exercise 
handicrafts, to the great hinderance and impoverishing of the 
King's liege people.” 

Rut it was not merely on account of the monopoly enjoyed in 
most instances by the foreigners, that the indignation of the 
London populace was chiefly excited. From the language of that 
veracious chronicler, Hall, who was alive at the period now under 
notice, it would appear that the insolence of the strangers was 
fully equal to the benefits they enjoyed. 

“ In this season,” says the writer just referred to, “ the Geno- 
wayes, Frenchemen, and other straungers, sayed and boasted 
themselfes to be in suche favoure with the kyng and hys coun- 
saill, that they set naughte by the rulers of the citie. And the 
multitude of straungers was so greate about London, that the 
pore Englishe artificers coude skace get any living. And worst of 
all, the straungers were so proude, that they disdained, mocked, 






















106 


SIR JOHN REST. 


and oppressed the Englishmen, whiche was the beginning of the 
grudge. For amonge all other thinges, there was a carpenter in 
London, called Willyamson, whiche bought two stock doves in 
Chepe, and as he was about to paye for them, a Frencheman 
toke them oute of his hande, and saide they were no meate for a 
carpenter. Well (saide the Englisheman) I have bought them, 
and now payed for them, and therefore I will have them. Nay 
(saied the Frencheman) I will have them for my lorde the am- 
bassadour, and so, for better or worse, the Frencheman called the 
Englishemen knave, and went away with the stock doves. The 
straungers came to the Frenche ambassadour, and surmysed a 
complainte againste the poore carpenter, and the ambassadour 
came to my lorde maire, and saied so muche, that the carpenter 
was sent to prison ; and yet, not contented with this, so com¬ 
plained to the kynge’s counsail, that the kynge's commandement 
waslaide on him. And when Sir John Baker, Knyht, and other 
worshipful persones sued to the ambassadour for hym, he 
answered, by the body of God, that the Englyshe knave shoude 
lose his lyfe, for he saied no Englishemen should deny that the 
Frenchemen required, and other annswere had they none.” 

These feelings were fostered by one John Lincoln, a 
broker, and Dr. Bell, a canon, both of whom openly preached 
against the strangers. The latter were consequently insulted, 
and some of them beaten in the streets; but upon their seeking 
the protection of the Lord Mayor, several of the most malignant 
of their assailants were sent to prison. “ Then suddenly,” says 
Stow, “ rose a secret rumour, and no man could tell how it 
began, that, on May-day next following, the city would slay all 
the aliens ; insomuch that divers strangers fled out of the city.” 
The rumour reached the years of the King's council on May-day 
eve, and the attention of the Mayor and his brethren being 
immediately called to the circumstance, an assembly was held at 
the earliest possible hour to devise such measures of precaution 
as might appear necessary. The famous Sir Thomas More took 
an active part in these proceedings ; which resulted in an order, 
delivered by each Alderman personally to his ward, that no man 






























SIR JOHN HEST. 107 

after nine should stir out of the house, but keep his doors shut 
and his servants within until nine o'clock in the morning. 
Probably these precautions would have sufficed, but for the want 
of prudence in one of the Aldermen, who, returning from his 
ward just after the proclamation had been made, and finding two 
young men playing at bucklers in Cheap, with many others look¬ 
ing on, commanded them to leave off. One of them asked, why? 
Upon which the Alderman would have sent him to the Compter ; 
but that formidable body, the ’Prentices of London, was at this 
time in full vigour: the cry of ’Prentices ! ’Prentices ! Clubs ! 
Clubs ! resounded through the street, and the alderman found 
safety only in flight. The mischief was now set on foot. The 
throng of excited people was swelled from all quarters ; serving- 
men, watermen, and even courtiers, left their houses to join in 
the fray. The prisoners before mentioned were soon released. 
At St. Martin’s Gate Sir Thomas More met them, and earnestly 
and kindly exhorted them to go to their respective homes. But 
at this moment the people within St. Martin’s threw out stones 
and bats, and among several others, hurt one Nicholas Dennis, 
a sergeant-at-arms, who cried in a fury. “ Down with them !” 
The doors and windows of the neighbouring houses were forced 
instantly, and the insides completely gutted. After that they 
ran into Cornhill, in the neighbourhood of which dwelt a French¬ 
man, with whom various other foreigners lodged. This man’s 
house they likewise spoiled. Others went to different parts, 
broke open the strangers’ houses, and committed similar excesses. 
Thus they were engaged till about three in the morning, when 
they began to withdraw. But the Mayor was on the watch, and 
at once captured and sent to the Tower and other places of con¬ 
finement three hundred of their number, including women, and 
lads not above thirteen or fourteen years old. They were tried in 
the Guildhall on the 4th, and on the 7th John Lincoln and some 
twelve others were brought forth for execution. When the 
former had suffered, a respite arrived for the others. For what 
followed we must borrow the graphic pen of Hall, who most 
probably witnessed the scene he describes — 







108 SIR JOHN REST. 

“Thursday, the 22nd day of May, the King came into West¬ 
minster Hall, for whom, at the upper end, was set a cloth of 
estate, and the place hanged with arras : with whom went the 
Cardinal, the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk, &c. * * * The 

Mayor and Aldermen were there, in their best livery, by nine of 
the clock. Then the King commanded that all the prisoners 
should be brought forth. Then came in the poor younglings, 
and the old false knaves, bound in ropes, all along, one after 
another, in their shirts, and every one a halter about his neck, 
to the number of four hundred men and eleven women. And 
when all were come before the King's presence, the Cardinal 
rose, laid to the Mayor and commonalty their negligence, and to 
the prisoners he declared they had deserved death for their 
offence. Then all the prisoners together cried, ‘ Mercy, gracious 
lord, mercy!” Then the lords all together besought his Grace 
of mercy, at whose request the King pardoned them all. And 
then the Cardinal gave unto them a good exhortation, to the great 
gladness of the hearers. And when the general pardon was pro¬ 
nounced, all the prisoners shouted at once, and all together cast 
up their halters into the hall roof, so that; the King might per¬ 
ceive they were none of the discreetest sort.” Not the least 
interesting feature of this scene is the conduct of the rioters not 
apprehended. These sly fellows, keeping among the crowd, 
without, till they heard how matters were going, “ suddenly 
stripped them into their shirts, with halters,” and with penitent 
faces took their places among the other offenders, just in time to 
hear the pardon pronounced, The device succeeded, and some 
who would certainly have otherwise been dealt with hardly, as 
leaders in the affair, escaped. 





SIR JOHN SPENCER. 109 


SIR JOHN SPENCER, 

(lord mayor.) 

Sir John Spencer, Lord Mayor of London, in the year 
1594-5, is said to have been the wealthiest citizen of his time. 
So great, indeed, was his affluence that the appellation of the 
“ Rich Spencer ” was bestowed upon him by his fellow-citizens, 
and most appropriately, for he died worth nearly a million 
sterling. 

He was a member of the Company of Mercers. 

He served the office of Sheriff in the year 1584, in the 
mayoralty of Sir Edward Pullison. 

England at this period was in a state of great concern at a 
threatened invasion from Spain. The Catholic powers of the 
Continent were continually forming schemes for annoying or 
dethroning Elizabeth ; and Mary Queen of Scots, who, for politic 
reasons, was kept a close prisoner in England, was generally 
concerned in them. The king of Spain determined at length to 
make a decisive effort, commenced the preparation of a vast 
fleet, which he termed the Invincible Armada, and with which he 
designed to invade the English shores. So far had Elizabeth’s 
apprehensions increased with respect to this expected invasion, 
that she thought it necessary to keep the nation prepared against 
any unforeseen or sudden attack. The navy was now put on a 
respectable footing, and the able-bodied male population through¬ 
out the whole country were disciplined to the use of arms. The 
citizens of London during the shrievalty of Spencer, at their own 
expense, sent five thousand men, completely armed, to encamp 
on Blackheath ; at which place, they were several times reviewed 
by the queen. Soon after, also, the citizens sent a considerable 









110 


SIR JOHN SPENCER. 


body of men completely armed, to the assistance of the Dutch 
against the Spaniards. 

A circumstance which occured in the metropolis during the 
mayoralty of Spencer, will indicate the first discovery in London 
of a systematic training of youths in the art of theft. The city 
and neighbourhood, at this period, were so much infested with 
pickpockets and robbers that it was considered unsafe to walk 
the streets after nightfall. The authorities having taken the 
dangerous state of public morals under investigation, a re¬ 
gular school for the instruction of pickpockets, was discovered 
at Smart’s Key, near Billingsgate and suppressed. The method 
of imparting this singular species of instruction, is said still to be 
practised in the training of the youthful mind, in the science of 
plunder. In the centre of the room was placed the figure of a 
man, clad in the habiliments of the period. In one of the 
pockets of the upper garment was placed a purse of silver, and 
small bells were affixed to various parts of the figure. The test 
of proficiency was, to pick the pocket, or take the silver out of 
the purse without gingling the bells. 

In the year following and while Spencer was yet taking an 
important part in public affairs, the nation became more alarmed 
than hitherto at the vigorous preparations made by the Spaniards 
for the invasion of England. Elizabeth was now alert in forming 
the best measures for defence. She ordered all the commercial 
towns in England, to furnish ships to reinforce the navy; and on 
the 8th of March she sent the following letter to the Lord Mayor 
of London:— 

“Trusty and well-beloved. We greet you well. Whereas 
upon information given unto us of great preparations made in 
foreign parts, with an intent to attempt somewhat against this our 
realm, we gave present order that our said realm should be 
put in order of defence; which we have caused to be performed 
in all parts accordingly, saving in the City of London. We, 
therefore, knowing your readiness, by former experience, to per¬ 
form any service that well-affected subjects ought to yield to 
their prince and sovereign, do let you understand, that, within 


























SIR JOHN SrENCER. 


Ill 


our said city, our pleasure is, that there be forthwith put in 
readiness to serve for the defence of our person, upon such occa¬ 
sions as may fall out, the number of ten thousand able men, 
furnished with armour and weapons convenient; of which number, 
our meaning is, that six thousand be enrolled under captains and 
ensigns, and to be trained at times convenient, according to such 
further direction as you shall receive from our privy council, 
under six of their hands, which our pleasure is, you do follow 
from time to time, in the ordering and training of the said num¬ 
ber of men. And these our letters shall be your sufficient 
warrant for the doing of the same. Given under our signet, &c.” 

This letter from the queen was followed by another from the 
privy council, to the same purport, both of which being laid 
before the Common Council, they unanimously agreed to grant 
the royal request, and that the Aldermen and Common Council 
should raise men in their several wards respectively. A few 
days elapsed, and the privy council sent another letter to the 
Lord Mayor, requesting him to have them ready to march at the 
shortest notice. This was not only complied with but on the 
3rd of April, the Common Council granted a supply of fifteen of 
the largest ships in the river, and four frigates, which were imme¬ 
diately fitted out and supplied with all proper necessaries. These 
ships were afterwards augmented to the number of thirty-eight; 
the expense attending which, together with the ten thousand 
troops, was defrayed by the city, so long as they remained in her 
majesty’s service. The number of troops raised in the several 
wards were levied in the following proportions :— 


Farringdon Within . . . 

... 807 

men 

Aldgate. 

... 347 

95 

Coleman Street .... 

... 229 

55 

Bassishaw . 

... 177 

55 

Billingsgate. 

... 365 

55 

Broad Street. 

... 373 

55 

Bread Street. 

... 386 

55 

Aldersgate . 

... 232 

55 

Bridge . 

... 383 

55 





















112 


SIR JOHN SPENCER. 


Dowgate .... 

. 384 men 

Cornhill .... 

.191 


Castle Baynard . . 

.551 

33 

Lime Street 

.99 

33 

Cheap . 

.358 

33 

Queenhithe 

.404 

33 

Farringdon Without 

.1264 

33 

Cordwainers 

.301 

33 

Tower Street . 

.444 


Walbrook . . . . 

.290 

33 

Vintry. 

.364 

33 

Portsoken .... 

.243 

5) 

Candlewick . . . 

.215 

55 

Cripplegate 

.925 

33 

Bishopsgate 

.326 

33 

Langbourn . . 

.349 

33 


The zeal of the citizens of London in this and the following year 
contributed greatly to the security of the nation. It was by the 
influence, however, of the merchants of the metropolis that the 
independence of the country was chiefly maintained. While the 
king of Spain was busily engaged in forwarding his preparations 
for invasion, Thomas Sutton, (the immortal founder of the 
Charter-house) in conjunction with Sir Thomas Gresham and 
several others, among whom was the subject of our notice, found 
means to get all the Spanish bills of exchange protested, which 
were drawn on the merchants of Genoa to supply Philip with 
money for carrying on his preparations. 

Alderman Spencer was raised to the Civic Chair at the close of 
the year 1594. The country was visited this year with a lamentable 
deficiency in the harvest. The wetness of the season advanced 
the price of wheat to three pounds four shillings per quarter, and 
grain of all sorts was so scarce, that stores of it were ordered by 
the city authorities to be laid up for the next harvest. 

During the mayoralty of Sir John Spencer, the licentiousness 
of the London populace, which, for years had become more 
and more flagrant, proceeded beyond all limits. In association 




























SIR JOHN SPENCER. 


113 


with the city apprentices, whom they had persuaded to join them, 
they excited such repeated and alarming riots that it was 
thought necessary by Spencer to lay the case before the lord 
treasurer for her majesty’s directions. In consequence of this 
application on the 4th of July, 1595, a proclamation was 
issued, in which her majesty appointed a provost martial, with 
power to apprehend all rioters and to punish them according 
to the rules of martial law. Sir Thomas Wilford, the provost 
martial, patrolled the city, with a numerous company on horse¬ 
back, armed with pistols, and apprehended many of the rioters, 
whom he took before the justices appointed for their examination. 
On the 22nd of July, they were tried at Guildhall, under a com¬ 
mission of Oyer and Terminer; when five of them received sentence 
of death, and were executed two days afterwards on Tower Hill. 
Intimidated by the rigorous example thus set them, the courage 
of the mob became broken and peace was restored to the city. 

An occurrence, also, which took place during the present year, 
connected with the affairs of the city is worthy of mention in this 
place. The office of recordership having become vacant, the 
appointment to which had always been vested in the corporation, 
the queen sent a letter to Sir John Spencer, informing him 
that she herself intended on the present occasion to fill up the 
vacancy, and desiring him to lay before her the names of such 
individuals as were to be nominated for the office. Alarmed 
at this extraordinary proceeding, the citizens suspecting it to be 
an attempt of the crown to deprive them of a vested prerogative, 
prudently nominated only one individual, Mr. James Altham, of 
Gray’s Inn. With this nomination, Sir John Spencer sent a 
letter to the lord treasurer, in recommendation of this gentleman, 
as a resident of the city, and explaining the inconveniences arising 
from absenteeism ; and concluding with his earnest hope that her 
majesty would be pleased to approve this nomination. It does 
not appear, however, that Elizabeth paid much heed to the 
request of the citizens on this occasion, for the name of John 
Crook, instead of that of Altham, appears on the city records, as 
having received the new appointment. 


i 


























114 


SIR WILLIAM CRAVEN. 


SIR WILLIAM CRAYEN, 


(lord mayor.) 


William Craven, a celebrated Lord Mayor of London, and 
ancestor of the noble family of the same name, was born at 
Appletrewick, in the parish of Burnsall, in the Deanery of Craven, 
in Yorkshire. His parents were poor, and, as the learned topo¬ 
grapher, Dr. Whittaker states, in his work entitled the “History 
of the Deanery of Craven,” are said to have consigned him to a 
common carrier for his conveyance to London, where he entered 
into the service of a mercer and draper. Little, however, is 
known of the subsequent years of his early life, except that he 
was “first apprentice” in Watling Street. He was afterwards in 
business for himself in Leadenhall Street, and acquired great 
affluence by those old-fashioned qualifications of a citizen, indus¬ 
try and frugality. 

Camden, in 1607, described him as “ equestie dignitate, et sena- 
ter Londinensis.” In 1611, he was chosen Lord Mayor, and in 
the following year he “ repaired and butijied ” (for so the word is 
spelt in the mouldering stone over the porch which records his 
generosity) his native parish church. His bounty was further 
commemorated by the following whimsical strain of eulogy, for¬ 
merly inscribed on the walls of the same edifice :— 

“ This church of beauty, most repaired thus so bright, 

Two hundred pounds did coste Sir William Craven, Knighte, 
Many other workes of charitie, whereof no mention here, 

True tokens of his bountie in this parish did appeare. 

The place of his nativitie, in Appletrewick is seene, 

And late of London citie Lord Mayor he hath beene ; 



















SIR WILLIAM CRAVEN. 115 

The care of his worke, so beautiful and faire, 

Was put to John Topham, clerke, by the late Lord Mayor, 

Of that most famous citie of London, so brighte, 

By Sir William Craven, that bountiful knighte; 

Borne in this parish, at Appletrewick towne, 

Who regarded noe coste soe the worke was well done.” 

By the will of this very worthy man, which bears date in July 
1617, considerable property was bequeathed to the poor of diffe¬ 
rent parishes, &c., and likewise £100 each to the hospitals of 
Christ, St. Bartholomew, Bridewell, and St. Thomas. He was 
buried with great pomp, in the church of St. Andrew Under¬ 
shaft. The house in which he resided in Leadenhall Street, was 
the old East India House. 

We have already mentioned Sir William Craven as the ancestor 
of the noble family which at the present day own the earldom of 
Craven. His eldest son, who was ennobled by Charles the 
Second, early acquired distinguished reputation as a soldier, under 
Henry, Prince of Orange, and the celebrated Gustavus Adolphus, 
King of Sweden. During the wars in the Palatinate, he was 
one of the gallant English volunteers that assisted Gustavus; 
and, at the storming of Creuternach, in February, 1632, (being 
then in his twenty-fifth year,) his determined bravery was a 
principal cause of the fortress being taken, after a sanguinary 
conflict of two hours continuance, in which all the English 
officers were wounded. In the first assault, the assailants were 
repulsed ; in the second, Lord Craven, although wounded in the 
thigh by a pike, was “ the very foremost man,” and he admitted 
the enemy to surrender, when they called for quarter, without 
unnecessary bloodshed. 

After the death of Gustavus, and when every chance of recover¬ 
ing the Palatinate was lost, his lordship entered into the service 
of the States of Holland, and he continued to serve them until 
the Restoration. Though he never took arms against the Parlia¬ 
ment, he aided both Charles and his son with considerable pecu¬ 
niary supplies, and also joined the exiled court at Breda. In 
consequence of this, and through a false affirmation that he had 






116 SIR WILLIAM CRAVEN. 

stigmatized the Parliament by the name of “ barbarous and inhu¬ 
man rebels,” all his estates and property in England were 
confiscated in March, 1650-1. The States-General interested 
themselves in his behalf, but he could obtain no redress until 
after the restoration. Charles the second, in March, 1664, con¬ 
ferred upon him the titles of Viscount Craven and Earl Craven, 
and on the death of Monck, gave him the colonelcy of the 
Coldstream regiment of foot guards. He died, on April 9th, 
1697, in his eighty-ninth year, and was buried at Binley, near 
Coventry. 

Lord Craven acquired great honour by remaining in London 
during the time of the dreadful pestilence in 1665, assisting to 
subdue its ravages, and to preserve order.* He likewise dis¬ 
played the most commendable zeal in suppressing fires, which in 
in his days were of frequent occurrence among the wooden 
buildings of the metropolis ; he was so soon upon the spot where 
a fire happened, that it was popularly said “ his very horse smelt 
it out.” 

But a great distinctive feature in the life of Lord Craven was 
his attachment to the daughter of James the first, espoused 
to the Elector of Hanover, and afterwards Queen of Bohemia. 

* Pepys, in his “ Diary,” mentions his seeing, at Sir Robert Viner’s, 
two or three great silver flagons, with inscriptions, made as gifts of the 
king to such and such persons of quality'as did stay in town the late great 
plague, for the keeping things in order. One of these was for Lord Craven, 
to whose personal activity the same writer thus incidentally alludes, when 
speaking of the pulling down of brothels in March, 1668 , by the London 
apprentices : “ Thence back to Whitehall, where great talk of the tumult, 
at the other end of the town, about Moorefields, among the ’prentices, 
taking the liberty of these holidays to pull down brothels ; and Lord, to 
see the apprehensions which they did give to all people at Court, that 
presently order was given for all the soldiers, horse and foot, to be in arms, 
and forthwith alarmes were beat by drum and trumpet through Westmin¬ 
ster, and all to their colours and to horse, as if the French were coming 
into the town. So Creed, whom I met here, and I, went to Lincoln’s Inn 
Fields, thinking to have gone into the fields to have seen the ’prentices, 
but here we found these fields full of soldiers, all in a body, and my Lord 
Craven commanding of them, and riding up and down to give orders, like 
a madman.” 





















SIR WILLIAM CRAVEN. 


117 


Granger says, that when in the low countries she was called the 
“ Queen of Hearts;” and Harte, speaking of the period when 
her husband, the Elector Palatine, was contending for Empire, 
affirms that her courage and presence of mind were so con¬ 
spicuous, and her figure and manners so attractive,—though not 
to be called a consummate beauty,—that “ half the army were 
in love with her.” “The fierce Christian, Duke of Brunswick,” he 
continues, “was her tractable slave ; and so were young Thurn and 
Lord Craven. They all fought for her as much as for the cause, 
and Lord Craven, when he left the wars, all hope of recovering 
the Palatinate being cut off by the death of Gustavus, carried his 
enthusiasm so far, that he built the fine house of Hampstead 
Marshall, on the banks of the river Kennet, in Berkshire, a tract 
of country not unlike the Palatinate, nor inferior to many parts 
of it in beauty, as a sort of asylum for his injured princess.” 

It is commonly supposed that Lord Craven was privately 
married to the Electress; and “thus,” remarks Dr. Whitaker, 
“ the son of a Wharfedale peasant matched with the sister of 
Charles the first; a remarkable instance of that providence which, 
as the Psalmist says, ‘ raiseth the poor out of the dust, and 
setteth him among princes, even the princes of his people.’” 




















118 


SIR RICHARD GRESHAM. 


SIR RICHARD GRESHAM 


(LORD MAYOR.) 


With the name of Gresham is associated every thing that is 
great and noble in connexion with the mercantile affairs of the 
first city in the world; and in introducing that name amongst 
those whom we chronicle, we feel that we are truly becoming 
acquainted with one in every respect entitled to be ranked 
amongst the “ Illustrious.” 

Sir Richard Gresham, the father of Sir Thomas Gresham, 
served the office of Lord Mayor in 1537-38, after having been 
Sheriff in 1531-32. Of his family, it may be said, that their 
earliest traces point them out as having derived their name from 
a small village in Norfolk, where it had settled for many genera¬ 
tions. The heralds describe one John Gresham, who resided at 
Gresham during the latter part of the fourteenth century; but 
his son James is stated to have settled at Holt, a few miles dis¬ 
tant from his native village. James Gresham was succeeded by 
his son John, who married Alice, daughter of Alexander Blyth, 
Esq., of Stratton, by whom he had four sons—William, Thomas, 
Richard (the subject of the present notice), and John. The 
honour of knighthood was conferred upon the two last-named by 
Henry VIII.; of the two elder brothers not much seems to be 
known. 

Sir Richard Gresham was born at Holt, but brought up in 
London, where he was apprenticed to Mr. John Middleton, an 
eminent mercer, and merchant of the staple at Calais. In 1507, 
he was admitted to the freedom of the Mercers’ Company. 































SIR RICHARD GRESHAM. 119 

Though occasionally engaged in Flanders, he pursued his busi¬ 
ness at home, where he attained, in succession, to the several 
honours of citizenship. That he was frequently employed in the 
service of the state, and was its accredited financial agent, is, 
however, certain; and he appears to have been one of those in¬ 
dividuals of whose number were Sir John Hackett, John Hutton, 
and others, on whom Wolsey and Crumwell, as Prime Ministers, 
were accustomed to depend for foreign intelligence, and co-opera¬ 
tion in working out their plans at home. Thus, in 1526, Richard 
Gresham wrote to the cardinal from Flanders, apprising him of 
an arrest of the English, and a general seizure of merchandise at 
Nieuport; and about the same time, we find him amongst his 
fellow citizens, supporting the demands of the crown with a 
degree of warmth which called forth the unqualified expression of 
their displeasure. Hall, in his Chronicles, says, that supplies 
were required to enable Henry VIII. to carry on the war with 
France ; and Wolsey, after attempting some arbitrary impositions, 
which drove the Londoners very nearly into a state of rebellion, 
solicited a voluntary contribution of the mayor and aldermen. 
This they also refused to comply with, until they had communi¬ 
cated his request to the common council, who so indignantly 
rejected it, that the court moved for expelling Richard Gresham, 
John Hews ter, and Richard Gibson, three of their members who 
ventured to speak in favour of the measure. On his death-bed, 
Wolsey spoke of Gresham as his “friend;” and whilst a prisoner 
in the tower, explained to Sir William Kingston that he was 
indebted to him in the sum of £200. This was in the year 1530. 

In 1531, as we have stated, Richard became Sheriff of the 
City of London; and in October, 1537, was elected Lord Mayor. 
The dignity of the chief civic officer was at that time commonly 
augmented by the honour of knighthood, and, during his mayor¬ 
alty, Gresham received that distinction. A letter which he wrote 
a few days after his election to the civic chair, is still preserved. 
It was addressed to Crumwell, on the occasion of the death of 
Queen Jane Seymour, an event which occurred a few days after 
she had given birth to Edward VI. It is as follows:— 








120 


SIB. RICHARD GRESHAM. 


“ Myne humble dieuty rememberyd to your good lordeshipe, &c. 
Yet shall please you to untherstand, that by the commaundement 
of the Ducke of Northefolk, I have cawsyd xii c [1200] massys 
to be seyde, within the City of London, for the sowle of our moste 
gracious Quene. And whereas the mayer and aldyrmen, with 
the commenors, was lattely at Powlles, [St. Paul’s,] and ther 
gave thanckes unto God for the byrthe of our prynce. My lorde, 
I doo thyncke yt when convenyent that ther shulld be allsoo at 
Powlles a sollem derige and masse ; and that the mayer, alldyr- 
men, with the commeners, to be there, for to praye and offer for 
hyr grace’s sowle. My lorde, yt shall please you to move the 
kynges highnes, and hys pleasser knowen in thys behelve, I am 
and shale be redy to accomplyche his moste gracious pleasser. 
As knowethe God, who gyve unto you goode helthe with long 
lyve.—From London, thys Thurssdaye, the viiith daye of 
November. 

“ My lord, yf ther be eny allmes to be gyven, ther ys many 
power pepyll within the cite. 

“ Your owne, at your lordeshepes commaundementes, 

“ Ryc. Gresham.” 

This letter merits preservation, were it only for the humanity 
which dictated the concluding sentence. But the charitable spirit 
of Sir Richard Gresham will best appear from the following very 
remarkable petition, wherein he prefers no selfish suit, but avails 
himself of his influence with the king to plead the cause of the 
afflicted and the friendless. It seems difficult whether most to 
admire the benevolence of the writer, the earnestness with which 
he presses his request, or the dexterity with which he avails him¬ 
self of the arguments likely to have most weight with the king, 
and best calculated to secure a favourable result to his application. 
The letter is as follows :— 

“ Most redowted, puysant, and noble prynce ; my most dradd, 
beloved, and naturall sovraigne lord: I, your pore, humble, and 
most obedient servaunt, dailly consideryng, and ever more and 
more perceyvyng by your vertuus begynnyngs, and charitable 
procedyngs in all your cawses, your persone and majestie royall 































SIR RICHARD GRESHAM. 121 

to be the elected and chosen vessell of God, by Avhom not alonely 
the very and true worde of God is, and shal be sett forthe, and 
accordyng to the trewghth and verytie of the same, but also to be 
he whom God hath constituted and ordeyned bothe to redresse 
and reforme all crymes, offences, and enormyties beying repug¬ 
nant to his doctrine, or to the detryment of the common welthe, 
and hurt of the pore people, beying your naturall subjects ; and 
forder, to foresee and vigilantly to provyde for the charitable 
reformacion of the same, whyche thynge hath, and yet dothe en- 
corrage me, and also my bounden dewtie obligethe me, (in espe- 
ciall beyng most unworthy your Levetenaunt and Mayer of your 
Cytie Royall of London,) to enforme and advertise your most 
gracious highnes of one thyng in especiall, for the ayde and corn- 
forte of the pore, sykk, blynde, aged, and impotent persons beyng 
not able to helpe theymselffes, nor havyng no place certen where 
they may be u refresshed or lodged at, tyll they be holpen and 
cured of theyr diseases and syknes. So it is, most gracious lorde, 
that nere, and withyn the Cytie of London, be iij hospytalls, or 
spytells, commonly called Seynt Marye’s Spytell, Seynt Barthil- 
mewe’s Spytell, and Seynt Thomas’s Spytell; and the new abbey 
of Tower Hyll, founded of good devocion, by auncient faders, and 
endowed with great possessions and rents, onely for the releffe, 
comforte, and helpyng of the pore and impotent people, not beyng 
able to helpe theymselffes, and not to the mayntenaunce of 
chanons, preests, and monks to lyve in pleasure. Nothyng 
regardyng the miserable people liyng in every strete, offendyng 
every clene person passyng by the way, with theyre filthy and 
nasty savours. Wherefore may it please yourmarcifull goodness, 
(enclyned to pytie and compassion,) for the releffe of Cryst’s very 
images, created to his own similitude, to order, by your high 
authoritie, as supreme head of this Chyrche of England, or other¬ 
wise by your sage discrecion, that your Mayer of your Cytie of 
London, and his brethern, the aldermen for the time beyng, shall 
and may from henssforthe have the order, disposicion, rule, and 
governance bothe of all the lands, tenements, and revenews apper- 
teynyng and bclongyng to the said hospitalls, or any of theym; 









122 SIR RICHARD GRESHAM. 

and of the ministers which be, or shal be withyn any of them. 
And then your grace shall facilie perceyve, that where now a 
small nombre of chanons, preests, and monkes be founde, for 
theyr own profitt onely, and not for the common utilitie of the 
realme, a great nombre of pore, nedy, sykke, and indigent per- 
sones shal be refresshed, maynteyned, and comforted, and also 
healed and cured of theyr infirmyties, frankly and freely, by phy- 
sicions, surgeons, and potycaries, which shall have stipende and 
salarie onely for that purpose ; so that all impotent persons not 
hable to labour shal be releved, and all sturdy beggars not wyl- 
ling to labour shal be punyshed. For the whiche doyng, your 
grace shall not alonely merit highly towarde God, but show your- 
selffe to be more charitable to the pore than your noble progenitor, 
King Edgar, foundour of so many monasteryes; or King Henry 
the Thyrde, renewer of Westminster; or King Edward the 
Third, foundor of the new abbey; or Kyng Henry the Fyfte, 
foundor of Syon and Shene; but also shall have the name of con- 
servatour, protectour, and defendour of the pore people, with 
their contynuall prayer for your helthe, welthe, and prosperitie 
long to endure. 

“ Your humble and most obedient Servant, 

“ Rychard Gresham.” 

This letter to the King, or petition, as it may be called, 
was, to a certain extent, favourably received by Henry, who 
granted its prayer on behalf of the city hospitals ; and the grant 
was afterwards confirmed by Edward the Sixth. But the letter 
of Sir Richard Gresham, which is best known, and has been most 
frequently quoted, is that in which he declared his anxiety to 
erect a bourse, or exchange, in Lombard-street, for the conve¬ 
nience of merchants, who, at that period, were accustomed to 
assemble twice every day in the open street, where they were 
exposed to all the inclemency of the weather. This project, so 
often unsuccessfully mooted, Sir Richard seems to have had much 
at heart. He had visited Antwerp, where a bourse had newly 
been erected, and in 1537 had submitted to Cromwell (then Lord 
Privy Seal) a design for a similar edifice, which he was bent on 
















SIR RICHARD GRESHAM. 


123 


seeing constructed at home. Before retiring from his mayoralty, 
in 1538, he made another effort in furtherance of his favorite 
project, by calling the circumstance to his lordship’s remem¬ 
brance, and in this letter, after referring to the plan which he had 
previously submitted, he says, “ I doo supposse yt wyll coste 
ii m. li (£2000) and more, wyche shal be very beautyfull to the 
citie, and alsoo for the honour of our soveraygne lord the kinge.” 

The letter is dated in July, 1538, and Sir Richard expressed his 
ability to collect £1,000 for the furtherance of his object, before 
his term of office expired, on condition that he could obtain 
“ sertyn howssis in the said strette, belongyn to Sir George Mon¬ 
nocks,”—a consummation which he could not accomplish. With 
Sir Richard Gresham, however, rests the honour of having 
originally projected the “ goodely bursse,” which his son was 
happily possessed of the means, as well as the inclination, thirty 
years later, to construct. From the Chronicles of Grafton, it 
would nevertheless appear, that though thus unsuccessful in his 
favourite project, Sir Richard did obtain for the merchants permis¬ 
sion to exercise the privilege of exchanging, without restraint; an 
advantage of which they had been, at a former period, deprived 
by royal proclamation, and which, says the authority from whom 
we quote, “ they could no more be without, than the ships in the 
sea can be without water.” 

Sir Richard, as we have said before, was an accredited financial 
agent of the state, and was frequently employed in its service, as 
is to be seen from the state correspondence of the period in which 
he lived. He appears, indeed, to have studied the road to royal 
favour, by acceding a willing acknowledgment of Henry’s eccle¬ 
siastical supremacy; nor does he seem to have been one who 
at any time opposed himself to the mandates of the imperious 
monarch. In 1532, it became his duty, as sheriff, to receive into 
his custody, and commit to Newgate, James Bainham, Esq., a 
Protestant gentleman, of the Temple, who suffered martyrdom in 
Smithfield, on the 30th of April, and in 1540, he was in the com¬ 
mission, under Bishop Bonner, for persecution upon the six 
articles, a commission which Foxe calls “ the whip with six 






124 SIR RICHARD GRESHAM. 

strings.” In all his proceedings, at this period, “ the king’s 
pleasure ” seems to have been the rule of his life, and whilst it 
is but charitable to ascribe the harsher features of Sir Richard’s 
character to the intolerant spirit of the times in which he lived, it 
must be admitted that the City of London had not previously 
possessed a greater benefactor. 

Sir Richard Gresham died at Bethnal Green, where he generally 
resided. His death is stated by those who have good evidence 
of the fact, to have taken place on the 21st of February, 1548-9, 
most probably the latter year. He was buried in the church of 
St. Lawrence Jewry, the coat of arms which had been granted to 
him during his mayoralty, being placed over his tomb. The 
family historian (Barrow) tells us that Sir Richard was twice 
married, first (in 1517, probably) to Audrey, daughter of Wil¬ 
liam Lynne, Esq., of South wick, in Northamptonshire ; secondly, 
to a widow, named Isabella Taverson, who survived him until 
1565. By his first marriage he had four children; two daughters 
—Christiana, who married the wealthy Sir John Thynne, of 
Longleat, in Wiltshire, from whom the Marquis of Bath is descen¬ 
ded; and Elizabeth, who died unmarried, in 1552. Sir Richard 
had also two sons, of one of whom (Thomas) it will become us 
to speak in a future article. His net annual income at the time 
of his death is said to have been £850 2s. 6d., of which Lady 
Gresham inherited £282 7s. per annum ; Sir John £188 13s. 6d., 
and Thomas, afterwards Sir Thomas Gresham, £94 10s. 8d. By 
his will he left rings to all his friends, not forgetting Protector 
Somerset and his Lady, to each of whom he left a ring of the 
value of £5. 





SIR JOHN GRESHAM. 


125 


SIR JOHN GRESHAM. 


(LORD MAYOR.) 

Sir John Gresham was the younger brother of Sir Richard 
Gresham, of whose life the preceding chapter is a brief sketch. 
His birth-place was at Holt, but he also was apprenticed to 
Mr. John Middleton, of London. He was admitted a member of 
the Mercers’ Company in 1517, became a merchant of consider¬ 
able importance, and was elected to the highest office the City of 
London can confer, in 1547. 

At the earliest period of the history of this family, 
the English traded to the Levant, and John Gresham was 
one of the principal adventurers. On one occasion, having hired 
a Portuguese vessel, and loaded it at Scio with merchandise for 
the English market, the Portuguese, to whom the vessel belonged, 
dishonestly detained it in Portugal, and made himself master of 
the cargo, which was valued at 12,000 ducats. Henry VIII. 
deemed this injury done to a British subject not unworthy of his 
notice, and wrote to John of Portugal, desiring that the property 
might be restored: the letter is dated the 15th of October, 1531, 
and has been preserved by Hakluyt. Another illustration of the 
early traffic of this family with the Levant is supplied by the will 
of Lady Isabella Gresham, (Sir John’s sister-in-law), where par¬ 
ticular mention is made of her “ Turkey carpets,” a great luxury 
for a private individual in an age when rushes formed part of the 
furniture of the Court. John Gresham became Sheriff of London 
in 1537, (the year of his brother Richard’s mayoralty), and was 
knighted while in that office. 

After the lapse of three centuries, we catch but imperfect 









126 


SIR JOHN GRESHAM. 


glances of such a character as Sir John Gresham; but we may 
infer that he was held in high consideration, and lived, as our 
ancestors would have said, in great worship, from the following 
entry in an old MS. account of payments made “by John Gostwyk, 
treasurer unto the king’s majestie of the first-fruits and tenths, 
to these personnes ensuying, for diverse and sundry his majestie’s 
affaires;” from which we learn, that when Anne of Cleves came 
to England in 1539, for the purpose of being united to Henry 
VIII., the task of entertaining certain of her train fell to the share 
of our knight:— 

“ To certain inholders of Greenwiche and London, for their 
dietts, and lodging of certain gentilmen that came over with the 
queen’s said grace, £387 6s. 7d. 

“ To Sir John Gressham for the charge of the ambassadors 
lodged in his house, £56 4s. 4d.” 

In the same document mention is made of Sir Richard, father 
of Sir Thomas Gresham, and brother of the preceding, viz.:— 

“To Sir Richerde Gressham for a cheyne of fyne golde whiche 
was geven to a gent, that came from the Duke of Bavyer, 
£100 13s. 9d.” 

Liberality and benevolence appear to have been qualities inhe¬ 
rent in this family, for, in 1546, having purchased of his eldest 
brother, William, the mansion-house at Holt, where their father 
had lived, and where himself and his brothers were born, Sir John 
Gresham converted it into a free grammar school, which he 
endowed with the manors of Pereers and Holt Hales, in Norfolk, 
with all their appurtenances; besides upwards of ten freehold 
estates in the same county, and three more in London. Had the 
trustees of this school been formerly distinguished for the same 
vigilance which characterises their representatives at the present 
day, it would not have been our painful duty to state, that of the 
extensive demesnes with which Holt Grammar School was 
endowed by its founder—sufficient, had they been properly 
managed, to have set it on a level with the first establishments 
of a similar nature in England—there remains at present but 162 
acres of land. Its total revenue amounts to not quite £350, about 




SIR JOHN GRESHAM. 127 

two-thirds of which arise from the rents of its estates in London. 
Most of the above-named property seems to have lapsed previous 
to the year 1592; for the Fishmongers’ Company (to whom the 
management of the school was confided by its founder,) have no 
evidence that the greater part of it was in their possession in that 
year,—the earliest period to which they are able to refer. In the 
manor of Holt Hales they have no interest beyond the receipt of 
a fee-farm rent of £7 per annum, paid to them by the present 
lord of the manor. Notwithstanding every disadvantage, this 
school, liberally conducted, and regulated by salutary statutes, is 
in a flourishing condition at the present day, and educates fifty 
free scholars ; to any one of whom, removing to either of the 
universities, an annual exhibition of £20 is allowed. 

Sir John Gresham succeeded in obtaining from Henry VIII. 
the hospital of St. Mary, Bethlem, which has continued ever 
since in the hands of the corporation of London, as an asylum 
for lunatics. In 1547, upon his election to the office of chief 
magistrate, he revived the splendid pageant of the Marching 
Watch; a ceremony which had been practised from time imme¬ 
morial by the citizens of London at Midsummer; but having been 
prohibited by royal command in 1528, on account of the preva¬ 
lence of a disorder, known as the sweating sickness, and again 
in 1539, it remained in disuetude until the year of Sir John 
Gresham’s mayoralty. The period then fixed for its celebration 
was the eves of St. John and St. Peter, and what rendered it 
particularly attractive on the present occasion was, an accession 
of “ more than 300 demi-launces and light horsemen, that were 
prepared by the citizens to be sent into Scotland.” In the Lady 
Long’s household book, preserved at Hengreave, in Suffolk, 
according to Gage’s History, the following entry occurs, relating 
to this ceremony“ Paid to xxx men, for weying of your la : 
harneys on Midsommer eve, and St. Peter’s eve; that is to say, 
xs. to my L. Mayor, and xx to Sir Rowland Hill;” “My Lord 
Mayor,” being Sir John Gresham. 

Stowe somewhat graphically mentions Sir John Gresham, when 
he describes how Protector Somerset, on the afternoon of October 




128 SIR JOHN GRESHAM. 

14, 1549, “was brought from Windsor, riding betwixt the Earls 
of Southampton and Huntingdon, through Oldbourne, in at New¬ 
gate, to the Tower of London, accompanied with divers lords and 
gentlemen, and 300 horse.” The Lord Mayor, Sir Ralph Warren, 
Sir John Gresham, Mr. Recorder, and other city dignitaries, he 
says, “ sat on their horses against Soper-lane,” [now Bow-lane,] 
the officers standing with bills and halberds while the Duke 
passed. 

Sir John was repeatedly employed as agent in Flanders to 
Henry VIII; nor did his commission cease with that monarch’s 
reign, for in the council book of the succeeding monarch, he 
obtains frequent notice as a financial agent; and after having 
amassed a considerable fortune in trade, by which he was enabled 
to purchase many estates in Norfolk, besides the manor of Titsey, 
in Surrey, he died of a malignant fever on the 23rd of October, 
1556,—seven days after he had made final dispositions for the 
government of Holt-School,—and was interred in the beautiful 
church of St. Michael Bassishaw, in which parish he resided at 
the time of his death. “ He dwelt,” says Stowe, “ where Sir 
Leonard Halliday, who was mayor, anno 1605, afterwards dwelt.” 
Strype furnishes a list of worthies, who, in a short space, fell 
victims to the same pestilential malady ; and he does not omit to 
mention Sir John Gresham among the number. 

The day of his interment happening to be a fast-day, the same 
authority says, an extraordinary fish dinner was provided for the 
occasion, at which were admitted all that came ; and the funeral 
sermon was preached by the celebrated Dr. Harpsfeld. To judge 
from the ceremonial of his interment, he must have been a 
personage of great consideration. “He was buried,” says Stowe, 
“with a standard and penon of arms, and a coat armour of 
damask [damascus steel], and four penons of arms ; besides a 
helmet, a target and a sword, mantles and the crest, a goodly 
hearse of wax, ten dozen of pensils, and twelve dozen of 
escutcheons. He had four dozen of great staff torches, and a 
dozen of great long torches. The church and the streets were 
all hung with black, and arms in great store j and on the morrow 







SIR JOHN GRESHAM. 129 

three goodly masses were sung ; one of the Trinity, another of 
our Lady, and the third of requiem.” His charitable bequests 
were very numerous. Besides £100 to poor maids’ marriages, 
and considerable sums to the different prisons and hospitals of 
London, he left to sixty poor men, and forty poor women, as 
many black gowns, of the value of 26s. 8d. and 20s. each 
respectively.” Sir Rowland Hill, and Sir Andrew Judd, knights, 
conjointly with his “ well-beloved nephew, Thomas Gresham,” 
were appointed overseers of his will. To the Mercers’ Company 
he left £13 6s. 8d. for a feast,—desiring them, “after dynner, to 
have my soul in remembrance with their prayers.” He was 
twice married, and by his first wife had eleven children, from the 
eldest of whom was descended Sir John Gresham, the represen¬ 
tative and last baronet of the family, who died at Titsey, on the 
20th of October, 1801. 


K. 















130 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


(j.Oft.n MAYOR. 1 ) 


The materials for the history of a life so illustrious as that 
which now demands our attention are so voluminous—the details, 
as bearing upon the fortunes of the future “merchant-princes” 
of England, are so manifold—that we must be excused if, in our 
summary, we extend the notice of the life of Sir Thomas Gresham 
to a length beyond that which the scope of the work which we 
have undertaken would seem to prescribe as the limit beyond 
which the biographer ought not to pass; so also would the com¬ 
piler desire to be held pardonable if, in arranging his materials, 
he should unintentionally omit any point which it may be import¬ 
ant the readers of such a work as the present should feel that 
they ought to have had placed before them. From the “ Life 
and Times of Sir Thomas Gresham,” by John Wm. Burgon, 
Esq., copious extracts have been made. 

Sir Thomas Gresham was the second son of Sir Richard 
Gresham, by his first wife Audrey, daughter of William Lynne, 
Esq., and appears to have been named after his uncle, the rector 
of South Repps. The place of his birth was most probably 
London; and the time, as near as can be ascertained, was some¬ 
time during the year 1519. Of his youth very little indeed is 
known, except that he had the misfortune to be deprived of a 
mother’s care at the tender age of three years; and that, after 
receiving the rudiments of learning, he was subsequently sent to 
Cambridge, and admitted a pensioner of Gonville Hall. Here he 
imbibed that attachment to the Protestant faith which is con¬ 
spicuous throughout all his correspondence; and to his residence 





SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


131 


at Cambridge, may most probably be ascribed that taste for 
literature, and that love of learned men, which distinguished him 
throughout life. Dr. Caius, in his Annals of the college which 
bears his name, and of which he was co-founder, notices Gresham 
in the following terms:—“Una nobiscum,” says he, “per juven- 
tutem hujus collegii, pensionarious erat Thomas Gresham, nobilis 
ille et ditissimus mercator, qui forum mercatorum Londini (quod 
bursam sen regale excambrum vocant,) extruxit.” These words 
occur in a beautiful folio MS. on vellum, preserved in an iron 
chest in the treasury of Caius college. 

It was, perhaps, not so much inclination as expediency which 
made him a merchant. The advantages to be derived from 
foreign commerce were at that time considerable; and his father 
evidently destined him for commercial pursuits, by binding him 
in his youth apprentice to his uncle, Sir John Gresham; in con¬ 
sequence of which he was, in 1543, admitted a member of the 
Mercers’ Company, being then in the 25th year of his age. Ten 
years afterwards, writing to the Duke of Northumberland from 
Antwerp concerning commercial matters, he says, “ To the wyche 
syence I myselfe was bound prentisse viii yeres, to come by the 
experyence and knowledge that I have. Neverthelesse I need 
not to have bynne prentisse, for that I was free by my father’s 
coppye : albeit, my father, Sir Richard Gresham, being a wyse 
man, knew, although I was free by his coppye, it was to no 
purpose, except I were bound prentisse to the same, whereby to 
come by the experience and knowledge of all kinds of merchan¬ 
dise.” 

The earliest contemporary notice of Sir Thomas Gresham occurs 
at this period of his history. He is mentioned in one of the 
despatches of Seymour and Wotton to King Henry VIII., written 
from Brussels in the month of June, 1543, and appears even then 
in the character of a merchant of some importance, although but 
twenty-four years of age. In the following year he was married 
to Anne, daughter of Wm. Ferneley, Esq., of West Creting, in 
Suffolk, and widow of Wm. Read, Esq., of Beccles, in the same 
county. It does not appear how many children Gresham had by 



132 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


his wife ; mention is only made of one, Richard. It seems that, 
although for the first few years after his marriage he made 
London his home, his business frequently carried him to Antwerp 
—then the great focus of commerce. But he was not destined 
to continue long in a private station. He was already dis¬ 
tinguished as a merchant possessing uncommon tact and ability, 
and a remarkable juncture in the financial affairs of the kingdom 
having occurred, he was soon called upon to take an important 
part in their management, being then in the thirty-second year of 
his age. 

In 1551, so highly esteemed were the commercial talents of 
Gresham, that he was appointed to the office of Royal Agent at 
Antwerp, at a time when by unskilful management the revenues 
of the crown had become seriously disarranged. Gresham himself 
has recorded his first interview with the youthful sovereign and 
his ministers in these words:—“I was sent for unto the counsell, 
and brought by them before the king’s majestie, to knowe my 
oppynyone (as they had many other merchants) what waye wythe 
least charge his majestie might growe out of debt. And after 
my device was declared, the king’s highness and the counsell re¬ 
quired me to take the room in hande, wythout my sewte or labour 
for the same.” As domestic financial agent, “Thomas Gresham, 
Mercer, of London,” is frequently noticed in the council-book of 
Edward VI. ; he must, therefore, have been frequently brought 
under the eye of the council, and it may be naturally inferred, 
from his having been “sent for” on the present occasion, that he 
enjoyed the reputation of being one of the most enlightened mer¬ 
chants of his day. He was placed in some difficulties, however, 
after his appointment as royal agent, from his ignorance of the 
fact that the ministers of Edward had determined to resist the 
iniquitous impositions on the part of the money-lenders; he never¬ 
theless removed with his wife, and took up his residence in the 
house of Jasper Schetz, one of the most distinguished merchants 
of the city of Antwerp. 

The office of Royal Agent, or as it was sometimes called King’s 











SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


133 


Merchant, or Factor, to which our merchant had been appointed, 
was of very early origin. It arose out of the exigencies of an 
imperfectly organised system of finance, which, when the country 
was threatened with war, or some other source of heavy expendi¬ 
ture, recognised but two modes of replenishing the coffers of an 
impoverished treasury, namely, to levy subsidies by an unjustifi¬ 
able stretch of arbitrary power ; or to induce wealthy merchants, 
under sufficient security, to advance the sums required. The 
former of these methods, which, in remote times, was doubtless 
had recourse to in the majority of instances, and with most suc¬ 
cess, was too convenient ever to be totally relinquished; but as 
the commercial wealth of Europe increased, the practice of ob¬ 
taining loans from the opulent merchants settled in Germany and 
the low countries, became more and more prevalent, until it was 
finally found expedient, on the part of Government, to employ an 
agent for the express purpose of negotiating them. This was 
always some one of high ability, influence, and integrity, whose 
province it was, in addition to the immediate duties of his office, 
to supply the state with whatever was required of foreign produc¬ 
tion. It was also expected of this servant of the crown, that he 
should keep the privy council informed of whatever was passing 
abroad ; and he was not unfrequently called upon to negotiate 
with foreign princes in the additional capacity of Ambassador. 
The office of “ Agent for the Crown, with the trading interest, 
or, as it was called, King’s Merchant,” says a modern writer, 
“ was one of the highest importance and trust, inasmuch as it 
united the duty of raising money for the royal occasions by pri¬ 
vate loans, with that of protecting and cherishing the sources 
from which they were derived.” It may be observed, also, that 
this office was distinct in itself, and altogether independent of the 
occasional employment of one or more domestic financial agents. 
It is stated, that in the discharge of this office, Sir Thomas 
Gresham enjoyed the confidence of his sovereign to an extent 
beyond that of any of his predecessors ; his administration of the 
affairs of the crown, in fact, being very nearly uninterfered with. 
The salary, or, as it was called, “ the diets,” was twenty shillings 
per diem. 
























134 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


Sir Thomas Gresham, however, did not reside at Antwerp by 
any means uninterruptedly; for, by his own account, such was 
the state of the countries during the first two years he served King 
Edward, that he posted from Antwerp to the Court, on receiving 
very short notices, no fewer than forty times. 

It appears, from the written statement of Gresham’s transac¬ 
tions, which he presented to Edward VI. on his return from 
Antwerp in the beginning of August, 1552, that between the first 
of March and the twenty-seventh of July, his payments of the 
debts and interest contracted by the King, had amounted to 
£106,310 4s. 4d. His own travelling expenses, for “ rydynge in 
and owght eyght tymes” during that period, together with those 
of the posts who had conveyed his letters to and from the council, 
had amounted to £102 10s.; and he had concluded his mission 
by giving his friends a feast, which forms the last item in the 
account. “ Paid,” he says, “ for a supper and a banckett that I 
made to the Fugger, and to the Schetz, and other that I have hade 
to do withall for your majesty, sens your hightnes hay the corny tted 
this great charge unto me, the 28 de July, anno 1552, £26.” 
This banquet was, doubtless, conducted on a scale of extraor¬ 
dinary splendour, as indeed Sir Thomas Gresham’s banquets 
always were; £26 in 1552 was equivalent to about £250 at the 
present day, and the persons feasted do not appear to have ex¬ 
ceeded twenty in number. 

With the termination of this mission, the services of Sir Thomas 
Gresham were not dispensed with ; for so much was the state 
involved by the heavy debts which had been contracted by 
Henry VIII., that his journeys to Antwerp to solicit the for¬ 
bearance of creditors, or effect new loans, were of frequent 
occurrence; and ultimately the suggestions which he proposed 
to the council for the liquidation of those debts met their 
approval. In his very voluminous correspondence on this ques¬ 
tion, Sir Thomas speaks his mind very freely to the Duke of 
Northumberland, and lays down the plan of reducing the whole 
of the debt (£108,000) in two years, by taking up a sum of £200 
or so, pei day, and thus doing, yt shall not be persevyd, nor 





SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


135 


yt shall not be no occasion to make the exchange fall; for that it 
shall be takyne up in my name. And so by these means, in 
working by delyberacione and tyme, the merchants turn also 
shall be servyd.” 

The preceding, however, was only one of many schemes sug¬ 
gested by this enterprising merchant, for raising the rate of the 
exchange at Antwerp in favour of England. To this object, 
indeed, he directed all his endeavours, and was constantly devising 
expedients to check whatever he perceived had a contrary ten¬ 
dency. His letters proved how little the nature of such opera¬ 
tions was then understood, and how thoroughly Gresham himself 
appreciated their importance. The nature and tendency of his 
operations will appear from the following passage, in his letter to 
the Duke of Northumberland, dated the 16th of April, 1553:— 
“ The exchange keepyth here at xix s. viii d. And so I have no 
dowght, but that it wille contynew; and rather lycke to ryse 
than to fall, whiche is one of the chieffyst poyntes in the 
comenwell that your grace and the kyng’s majesty’s counsell 
hath to looke unto. For has the exchange rysethe, so all the 
commodities in Ingland fallyth; and as the exchange fallyth, so 
all our commodities in Ingland rysethe. As also, if the exchange 
rysethe, it wille be the right occasion that all our golde and silvar 
shall remayne within our realme; and also it is the meane that 
all other realms shud brynge in golde and silvar, as heretofore 
they have done.” He then explained some of the principal 
causes of the decline of the exchange, and suggested as a remedy 
the absolute necessity, in future, of making none but those who 
had served a regular apprenticeship of eight years, free of the 
company of merchant adventurers ; for he showed that to the 
inexperience of many members of the company, the evil against 
which he was contending was principally attributable. But the 
most notable of all his expedients for raising the exchange, and 
bringing the crown out of debt, (an expedient to which he twice 
had recourse in king Edward’s reign,) was to detain the fleet of 
the merchants when it was on the point of sailing for Antwerp, 
and compel the proprietors of the merchandise to engage, on 























136 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

their arrival, to furnish the state with certain sums of money, 
to be re-paid at an appointed time in London, at a fixed rate of 
exchange,—of course the highest they could be brought to accede 
to. How correct he was in the results he anticipated from these 
and similar measures, appeared in the sequel by the success 
which attended them. He found means in a short space to raise 
the exchange from sixteen shillings Flemish for the pound 
sterling, to twenty two shillings, at which rate he discharged all 
the king’s debts ; and by this means money was rendered plen¬ 
tiful and trade prosperous, while the credit of the crown became 
established on a firmer basis abroad than it had ever been before. 

During Gresham’s early residence at Antwerp, he was selected 
as a proper person to sound the ambassador of Charles Y. (under 
whose dominion the Netherlands at that time were,) and to 
endeavour, as it were casually, to discover from him in the course 
of conversation, what disposition was entertained by the govern¬ 
ment he represented towards England. This he was able easily 
to accomplish, and the negociation which ensued led to many 
mutual protestations of good-will. 

During the time that he was thus actively engaged on the con¬ 
tinent, Gresham entrusted the conduct of his affairs in Lombard- 
street to his London factor, by name John Elliott. When 
business, on the contrary, carried Gresham to the court, or the 
council, his concerns in the Low Countries were left to the able 
management of a Welchman, named Richard Clough, who resided 
permanently at Antwerp. During all these transactions, as a 
matter of course, his establishment of servants, principally as 
“posts,” was effectually kept, nor do we find that any who 
served him faithfully went unrewarded. He had also factors at 
various ports, among whom was one named Edward Hogan, who 
resided at Seville, who sent Gresham the memorable “ payre of 
long Spanish silk stockings,” which he afterwards presented to 
Edward VI., and which Stowe has described as “ a great, present,” 
cloth hose being the wear of the court at that time. 

Affairs were thus prospering with Gresham when death 
■visited the prince whom he had so faithfully served, and Mary 










SIR THOMAS GRESHAM, 


137 


succeded to the throne of these realms. On her accession, 
Gresham was suddenly removed from his office of royal agent, 
owing most probably to the fact that the nobleman who had 
been his patron was most hostile to the Queen’s succession. He 
was besides, it is averred, personally obnoxious on the score of 
his religious opinions, and found a bitter opponent in Gardiner, 
the Roman Catholic Bishop of Winchester, whom the queen re¬ 
stored to the see of which her predecessor had deprived him. 
“ When the king, your brother, died,” said Gresham, writing to 
Queen Elizabeth in 1558, “ for rewarde of my servise the 
Bishoppe of Winchester sought to undoe me; and whatt soever 
I sayd in these matters, (alluding to some great measures of 
finance,) I should not be creditted.” 

The injustice of which he complained, and the grounds on 
which he founded his claims to different usage, will best appear 
from the following memorial drawn up by himself, apparently 
some time in August, 1553 ; on the 22nd of which month 
Northumberland, to whom it contains an allusion, died on the 
scaffold. We give the document at full length, as being of 
peculiar interest at the present day, and as illustrating the history 
of Gresham in his own words. He is addressing the Lords of 
the Council :— 

“ Fyrst, Before I was called to serve the king’s majestie, one 
Sir William Danssell, Knight, was his agent. At that time his 
majestye was indebted in the sum of two hundred threescore 
thowssonde powndes, Flemyshe : for the discharge whereof, and 
for other causes to me unknowen, the said augent was written 
unto to come home, which he reffused to doo. And thereupon 
I was sent for unto the counsell, and brought by them afore the 
king’s majestie to knowe my oppynyone, (as they had many other 
marchaunts,) which way, wythe leaste charge, his majestie might 
growe out of debt. And after my device was declared, the king’s 
highness and the counsell required me to take the room [place] 
in hande, wythout my sewt or labour for the same. 

“ Secondarly. Before I was called to sarve, there was no other 
ways devised to bring the king out of det, but to transporte the 

























138 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

treasure out of the realme; or else by way of exchange, to the 
great debasing of the exchange ; for a pownde of our current 
money there was brought in vallew to but xvis. Flemyshe; and 
for lacke of payment there at the dayes appointed, for to pras- 
sarve his majestie’s credit withal, to prolong time allsoe upon in¬ 
terest; which interest, besydes the loss of the exchange, amounteth 
unto xl m. li (£40,000) by yere. And in every such prolong- 
gation, his majestie was inforced to take great parte in jewels, or 
wares, to his extreme losse and domayge; of which xl m. li 
(£40,000) losse for interest yerely, I have by my travale clerely 
discharged the said king every peny. Wythe out wyche pre- 
venssion, the Queen’s majestie had been indebted at this her 
enttrye into the imperyall crown in the sum of fore hundred 
thousand pownds, besides the saving of the treassore within the 
realme; without tacking of juells or wares to the king’s losse or 
disprofit. 

“ Thyrdely. Whereas at the tyme of my entrey into the offis, 
I fownde the Exchange at sixteen shillings the pownde, I fownde 
the meanes nevertheless, (without any charge to the king, or 
hinderance of auny other,) to discharge the kinges whole dettes, 
as they grew dew, at xxs. and xxijs. the pownd; where by the 
king’s majestie, and now the quene, hathe savid one hundred 
thowsand markes clere. 

“ Forthely. By reason that I raissed the exchange from xvis. 
unto xxijs., (whereunto it yet remaynethe,) all forreyne commodi¬ 
ties be fallen, and sollde aftyr the same vallew ; to the enriching 
of the subjects of the realme in their commodities, in small 
process of tyme, above iii or iiij c. m. li [£300,000 or £400,000.] 

“Fyftely. By reason of raising of the Exchange from xvis. 
unto xxiis. the pownd, (Flemyshe monney,) like as in tymes past 
the golde and silvar was abundantly transported oute of the 
realme by the abasing ; even so, contrarywise, nowe it is most 
plentifully brought in ageynne by the rayssing. For there ys 
come alredy, of late, above i c. m. li (£100,000) into the realme ; 
and more and more will daylly doo. 

“ Sixtely. It is assuredly known, that when I toke this sarvis 








SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 139 

in hande, the King’s Majestie’s credit on the other syde was 
small; and yet, afore his deathe, he was in such credit, both with 
strangers and his own marchaunts, that he myght have had for 
what some of monny he had desyred. Whereby his enymyes 
began to fear him ; for the commodities of his realme, and his 
power amongst prynsis, was not known before. Wyche credit 
the Queaune’s highness hay the opteyned, if she were in necessity 
for money at this pressent daye. 

“ Seventely. To th’ entent to worcke this matter secretly, for 
the raising of the Exchange, I did only use all my own creditt 
with my substance and friends’—to the intent to prevent the mar¬ 
chaunts, bothe strangers and Englishe, who allwayes lay in wayte 
to prevent my devisses; as when th’ Exchaunge felle, to raise it 
again, I bare some one tyme losse of my own monies, (as the 
King’s majestie and his counsell well know,) ii. or iii. c. li (2 or 
£300.) And this was divers tymes done; besides the credit of 
fivetye thowsownd pownd, wyche I tooke by exchaunge in my 
own name, withought using the King’s name ; as in my accownt 
and letters remaynyng wyche I sent to his majestie, evidently 
apery the. 

“ And Eightly. For the accomplishment of the premises. I 
not onely lefte the realme, with my wiffe and famylye, my occu¬ 
pying and whole trade of lyving, by the space of two yeres, but 
also postyd in that tyme xl tymes, upon the Kinge’s sending, at 
the least, from Andwerpe to the courte ; besides the practising to 
bring these matters to effect, the infynyt occasion of writting also 
to the King and his counsaylle, with the keeping of reckonings 
and accomptes, (onely bye my own hand-writting, for mistrust in 
so dangeros a busines of preventers, whereof were store too 
manny,) untill I had clerely discharged all the foresaid debt, and 
delyveryd all the bondes clere, to the great benefit of the realme, 
and profit of the Queene. For in case this debt had been let 
alone, and differyd upon interest iiii yeres or v, her majestie 
should have fownd it amount to xv hundred thousand powndes 
at the least. Wyche (God be prayssyd !) is ended, and therefore 
careless at this daye. 






140 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

* 

. »• “ For consideracyone of my great lossys, and charges, and tra- 
vayles taken by me in the causes aforsaid, yt pleased the Kinge’s 
majestie to gyve unto me one hundrethe powndes to me and my 
heyres for ever, thre weckes before his deathe; and promysid me 
then, by his owne mowthe, that he wold hereaftyr se me rewardyd 
better, saing, I shulld knowe that I sarvecl a King. And so I dyd 
fynd him, for whose sowle to God I dayly praye. 

“ Finally. If, upon consideracion of the former articles of my 
service made, (wyche is all trewe,) ye shall thinke them mete to be 
shewed to the Queene, and her grace's pleasure to accept them, 
(allso as I may have access to her hightnes the rather thereby,) I 
doutt not to do her grace as good profitable service, bothe for 
her and her realme, as the former service of her brother dothe 
amounte unto. Nevertheles, hitherto I do perceive that those 
whiche served before me, wyche brought the King in debt, and 
tooke wares and juellis upp, to the Kingis great losse, are es¬ 
teemed, and prefferred for their evill servis; and contrarywise, 
myself discountenaunced, and out of favour. Wyche grevythe 
me not a little, for my dilligens and good sarvice taken to bringe 
the Kinge and Queene’s hightness out of dett clere. Wyche 
understanding of my service, that her majesty may take in good 
parte, is as moche as I required. 

“ As I was inselinge of the letter enclossed herein, I received a 
letter out of Flanders, whereby I understand, that as well as my 
plate, howshold stuffe, and aparell of myselfe and wyfe, (wyche I 
have sent and preparid into Andwerpe to serve me in time of my 
servys there,) by casualty of weather, comyng from Andwerpe, ys 
all loste. And now, God helpe poor Gresham! Allso the Lord 
of Northumberland dowthe owe me iiii c li (£400) for a juell 
and wares that my factor solid him in my absens ; trusting that 
the Queene’s majestie wil be good unto me therein.” 

That Gresham was unfairly treated, there seems no reason to 
doubt; but dismayed, perhaps, by the ruin of his late patron, and 
the evil plight of his friends at the Court, he apprehended greater 
misfortunes than actually fell to his share, as he was speedily and 
completely restored to the personal favour of Mary, as he himself 






SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 141 

says, by the timely interference of “ Sir John a Leye,” of whom 
little more seems to be known than that he was a Roman Catholic 
gentleman who possessed the ear of the Queen, and in a remark¬ 
able degree enjoyed her confidence. The probability is that their 
acquaintance was commenced at Antwerp, as Sir John was a man 
of travel. Gresham resumed his office as Queen’s Agent in 
November, and his first instructions were to “ take up, at 
Antwerp, the sum of £50,000, for the space of a year, on interest 
after the rate of 11 or 12 per cent.,” on the security of the Queen’s 
bond, and that of the City of London, under the Great Seal, as 
had been the case in King Edward’s time. All sums which he 
took up at interest, or by exchange, he was instructed to convey 
to London with the utmost possible secresy, in such coins of gold 
and silver as he thought most meet, loading them at Antwerp, on 
any ship bound for either London or Ipswich. Not more than 
£1000 was to be adventured in one bottom; but he was autho¬ 
rised to send the value of £3000 overland from Antwerp to Calais, 
and so to London, by any of his servants, or other trusty person 
going into England; the risk in either case being sustained by 
the Crown. He was allowed for his diet twenty shillings a-day, 
and was to be remunerated for all expenses for messengers, letters, 
and the carriage of treasure. He arrived at Antwerp on the 
evening of the 17th of November, and seems to have met with 
some difficulties in the object of his mission, arising out of the 
conduct of a negotiation with Lazarus Tucker, by one Dauntsey, 
who had been sent to Antwerp on the accession of Mary. A 
week after Gresham’s arrival, he wrote a letter to the Council, in 
which he says, “The Queen had better have given Dauntsey 
£10,000 than ever he should have proceeded in this matter, both 
for her honour and credit’s sake.” He succeeded, however, in all 
that he undertook. 

His correspondence of this period, which is preserved in the 
State Paper-office, although it relates solely to business, is very 
voluminous, and from it several hints are to be derived illustrative 
of the nature of the trust reposed in Gresham by the Queen, and 
the conditions on which he held his office as agent. Nor were 






142 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

his letters either few or far between, as may be gathered from the 
dates of those which are preserved. There are, for instance, des¬ 
patches of the 18th and 26th of November; the 6th, 8th, 20th, 
24th, 28th, and 31st of December; the 1st, 13th, 18th, 21st, and 
31st of January; the 6th, 15th, and 21st of February; and the 
1 st of March: and, what is somewhat singular, the writer com¬ 
monly addressed, on the same day, the Council collectively; some 
individual member, as the secretary, whom he knew to be favour¬ 
ably disposed tow r ard him ; and, lastly, the Queen. Occupations 
sufficiently pressing to require such constant correspondence, 
render it not surprising that Gresham should have declared to 
the Council, “ I shall not let to give up all my whole occupying 
and trayde of living for to serve her majesty; as I did no less in 
the King’s majestie’s lyfe tyme.” He obtained leave of absence 
for ten days, at Christmas, a privilege which, however, he was 
not able to avail himself of, and he accordingly determined to 
remain in Antwerp until the month of March, and then to retire. 
He did so, but had scarcely returned to England w r hen his ser¬ 
vices in Flanders were again required. 

At a meeting of the privy council on the 27th of March, Sir 
Richard Southwell, master of the ordnance, informed their lord- 
ships that there remained in the Tower but “ fourteen last of 
powder, which portion being by their lordships considered to be 
far too little for all events, and therefore thought meete to be 
supplied with all convenient speede ; they did resolve that whereas 
the said Mr. Southwell had heretofore warrant directed unto him 
whereby he was authorized to give order unto Thomas Gresham, 
to provide 40,000 lbs. weight of saltpetre in Roche; he should 
now, for a further supply give order in like manner to the said 
Thomas Gresham, to make provision out of Flanders of twenty 
last of well-chosen serpentine powder, over and besides the 
saltpetre aforesaid. And, forasmuch also as the said office of the 
ordnance is amongst other things presently unfurnished of 
harquebushes, it was further resolved by their lordships that the 
said Mr. Southwell should in like manner take order with the 
said Thomas Gresham to provide five hundred harquebushes from 








SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 143 

out of Flanders, over and besides other five hundred for which he 
hath warrant addressed unto him already.” No great haste 
seems to have been required in the execution of the order for 
these supplies, as Gresham did not return to Flanders until the 
expiration of ten weeks from his departure, and he arrived at 
Antwerp on the 12th of May. On the 22nd of the same month 
he again took his leave of that place, having concluded his 
business, and went into Spain, in which country also he had im¬ 
portant monetary affairs to transact. He obtained the king’s 
passport for exporting bullion from that country, and, after much 
fatigue and travel, returned to Antwerp in the spring of the 
following year. 

Gresham’s correspondence during this period was also very 
heavy; and he had the honour to receive some replies to his 
letters drawn up by Mary herself, in which she certainly exhibited 
great aptitude for business. To trace him, however, through 
every variety of adventure would not only be tedious to the 
reader, but at variance with the scope of the present work ; and 
it must, therefore, content us to remark that however favourable 
the disposition entertained towards him by those in office, there 
seems to have been wanting that cordiality between them which 
might have been expected; and however honourably treated by 
the Council, and favourably noticed by the Queen, Gresham 
generally confined himself, in addressing both, to the strictest 
details of business. A note of the Queen’s debts in Flanders, 
and an account of the sums of money taken up from time to time 
to discharge them, form, in consequence, the general topic of his 
letters, diversified only by an occasional note of payments made, 
or a memorandum of what bullion, arms, or ammunition he had 
shipped from Antwerp under King Philip’s license, and sent home 
by order of the Council. 

Such were the nature of Gresham’s occupations at Antwerp ; 
and such, more or less, were his employments from the period of 
his return from Spain in the beginning of 1555, until the 16th of 
June, on which day it is recorded, in the Acts of Queen Mary's 
Privy Council, that he presented to their Lordships nine “ obli- 





144 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

gations or bonds, as well as of bir highness as of the Cittie of 
London, which heretofore passed for the sure payment of certayne 
summes of money due to sundry merchants and strangers. All 
which bonds were cancelled, and sent to the Lord Treasurer, to 
be laid up in the Queene’s Treasury; and to deliver the Cittie s 
to the Lord Maior by the said Thomas Gresham.” 

On the 4th of October, 1555, Gresham again returned to the 
scene of his occupation, and witnessed the abdication of Charles 
the Fifth, in favour of his son Philip, which took place at 
Brussels, on the 25th of October, 1555, attended by great cere¬ 
mony. Plis occupation of the office of royal agent, however, 
seems to have been very frequently interrupted, as he himself 
says, that he only served the queen for two years, and her reign 
is known to have extended to five. Of the apparent cordiality 
which subsisted between her majesty and her faithful agent we 
have already spoken, and have noticed the manner in which he 
was accustomed to correspond with his royal mistress from 
Antwerp, minutely informing her of his progress in every financial 
operation. Of this class of his letters there exists no specimen 
more beautiful than one which he wrote on the 19th of August, 
1555. “To the Queen's most excellent Majestieenclosing 
“ a brefie extracte touchinge the state of your Majesty's holle 
dettes in Flanders; wythe the days of payment when the said 
dettes shall grow dew, as here aftyr too your hygtness maye 
more playnly apere.” But the following letter, written “ from 
Laytton,” on the 23rd of December, besides other points of 
interest which it contains, incidentally reveals the intercourse 
which continued to subsist between Gresham and the Queen, 
during his sojourn in England, when his occasions brought him 
hither :— 

“ It may please your most excellent majestie to be advertised, 
that at my last access I had to your highness, your grace’s 
pleasure was that I should confer with my lorde the Bishop of 
Ely, the Lorde Paget, and Sir William Peter, as touching your 
detts and charge beyond the seas. And being a dark night 
when that I departed from your majestie, I thought it not con- 



SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 145 

venyent to molest my Lordes that tliyng,—thinking the next 
day to have accomplished your majestie’s commission ; which I 
could not do, for that I was visited with a hott burning agew. 
Nevertheless, according to my most bownded dewty, I sent unto 
my said Lordes and Sir William Peter the next day my factor, 
John Elliott; to signify unto them your highness’s pleasure : 
wherein I perceived they were most ready to accomplishe the 
same, so farre forthe as that they had your majestie’s commys- 
sione so to doo. And for that my Lorde the Bishop made answer, 
a shuld be absent for iiij or v dayes, and my Lorde Paget also; by 
the reason of my continual syckness, I stayed till the coming of 
my said Lordes ; or untill suche tyme I had beene able to have 
come to have conferred with their honnors. Which, as yet, I 
have not done ; but always have given my Lorde of Ely, and 
my Lorde Paget, and Sir William Peter to understood, what 
money I had received of your majestie’s warrant of x m li. 
[£10,000] ; advertising your highness, that I have received at 
this instant, iiij M li. [£4,000], whereof I have delyvered by ex¬ 
change, the sum of ij M li. [£2,000], at xxi s. vi d.; wyche will 
redound muche to your majestie’s honnor and credit, as allso 
your proffyt. Which is the chiefest thinge (one of them) that 
your highness ought to consider. 

“ Since the which tyme, it maye please your majestie to under¬ 
stand, that as the xx st. of this present, my Lorde Treasurer sent 
me worde by my factor, John Elliott, that a had taken upon hym 
to confer wyth me to paye all your majestie’s detts; and that a 
was come to London to geve order for the payment of the sum of 
v m li. [5,000] towards the payment of the x m iiij C Iiij li. vi s. 
viij d. [£10,453 65. 8J.] Flemish, that your majestie oweth to 
Alexander Bouvyze, the xxv th of Janyver next. And for that 
your highness hath appoynted me to confer with other of my 
Lordes, according to my most bowndyd dewty, and the trust that 
it hath pleased your grace to have reposed in me, I have thought 
it most expedient for my discharge to advertise you of the pre¬ 
mises. Most humbly beseeching your majestie that I maye 
knowe your further pleasure therein : wherein I shall most re- 

L 




146 


SIR THOMAS GllESIIAM. 


verently follow your majesties order, wheresoever it shall stand 
with your grace’s pleasure to appoynte me ; so that it shall stand 
with your majestie’s honnor and credit and for the proffit of your 
majestie and the realrne. 

“And thus, for feare of molesting your majestie with my longe 
writing, I shall praye to God to geve me grace and fortewn that 
my servyce maye be always acceptable to your hyghness. As 
knoweth our Lorde, who preserve your nobell majestie in lielthe, 
and long lyfe, and long to rayne over us, with increase of muclie 
honner. From Laytton, the xxiij rd of December, in the year of 
our Lord God xvclv. [1555.] 

“ By your Majestie’s most humble and 

“Faithful obedient subject, 

“ Thomas Gresham, mercer.” 

I 

“To the Queene’s most excellent majestie.” 

The interruptions in his official duties, to which reference has 
been made, however unwelcome they may have been in other 
respects, afforded Gresham leisure for the pursuits of commerce, 
which, until the year 1552, he had prosecuted with equal assi¬ 
duity and success, and he had become an enrolled member 
of the guild of merchant adventurers ; a body incorporated 
by Edward the First, as early as 1296, when they estab¬ 
lished a factory at Antwerp ; but they did not assume the 
appellation until the reign of Henry VII. The prosperity of 
these merchant adventurers was permanent; certain privileges 
and immunities, originally granted to them by charter, had 
been confirmed by every successive monarch since their incor- 
poration ; and, few as they were in number, they virtually 
monopolized the commerce of the country. They constituted 
a fellowship, which was under the control of a governor, 
elected out of their own body; and they appointed deputy 
governors for all their residences at home and abroad. In the 
beginning of Elizabeth’s reign, they were in the habit of send¬ 
ing their cloths twice a year, at Christmas and Whitsuntide, 
into the low countries; the cloth shipped annually amounting in 
value to about seven or eight hundred thousands pounds. From 





















SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


147 


an entry in the Cottonian MS., it appears that Gresham alone, 
on one occasion, sent “ 4,500 western kerseys of the best sort, 
which sold with great profit to the Italians, at Antwerp.” 
From this incidental notice, may be inferred, the nature and 
extent of his private operations. 

Being in England, at Christmas, 1555, we find him among 
the number of those who presented a new year’s gift to Queen 
Mary. “ A bolte of fine Holland, in a case of black leather,” 
is mentioned as having been presented by Mr. Thomas Gres¬ 
ham ; who received, in return, “ owne guilt jug,” weighing 
sixteen ounces and a half—a larger present than was bestowed 
on most men of his quality. 

About the same time, also, we find recorded, a proof that the 
services Gresham had rendered the Queen were deemed satis¬ 
factory ; for she bestowed upon him the Priory of Austin 
Canons, at Massingham Magna, in Norfolk ; together with the 
manor and rectory of Langham, and advowson of the vicarage; 
the manors of Walsingham and Harford, besides those of Mers- 
ton and Combes, and the advowson of their respective rec¬ 
tories. Gresham himself valued the lands thus presented to 
him at two hundred pounds a year. He was subsequently, 
however, out of favour at court; but appears to have again 
basked in the smile of royalty in the last year of Mary’s reign; 
in March of which year he was directed to prepare himself for 
another journey into the low countries—his instructions being 
to raise £100,000, on loan, for one year. His last letter from 
Antwerp to Queen Mary, is dated the 23rd of October, 1558; 
she died on the 17th of November, a few weeks after that 
letter was written, and probably while Gresham was still at 
Antwerp. A fresh page was thus opened in his life. 

Elizabeth, who succeeded Mary on the throne, was living in 
retirement at Hatfield, at the period of her sister’s decease, and 
here she was speedily joined by Sir William Cecil, who became 
at once her principal secretary. Nor was Gresham long behind; 
for although there had been no intelligence of his reaching 
England at the time of Mary’s death, on the 17th, yet it is cer- 

l 2 



















148 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

tain that oil the 20th, when the first council was held, Gresham 
presented himself before Queen Elizabeth, and formed one of the 
group of statesmen who were assembled at Hatfield on that occa¬ 
sion, and derived his commission as Queen’s merchant imme¬ 
diately from the Queen herself—a mark of royal favour, which 
however highly he deserved, he was probably indebted to his 
friend Cecil for. Indeed, Gresham himself admits this, in relat¬ 
ing in his own style this portion of his history, and supplies a 
characteristic remark of Elizabeth, which is worth preserving. 
In writing to Cecil, he says:— 

“It maye please you to be a meane unto the Queene’s majes- 
tie for me; and to put her in remenbrance of my servisse done 
thys fyve yeres, that she maie have some remorsse upon me— 
according to her majestie’s promise, that she maid me, before 
you, at her highness’ house, Hatefylde, the xxth of November, 
anno 1558, when her highness came to the crowen: and that was, 
(upon the dyscoursing how I was handelyd in Quene Maryes 
tyme for my good servisse,) her highness promised me, by the 
fayth of a Queene, that ‘she wold not onely kepe one ear shut to 
hear me; but also, ‘yf I dyd her none other servize than I had 
done to King Edward, her latte brother, and Quene Marye her 
latte syster, she would geve me as much land as ever they both 
did ; ’ whyche two promises, I will insewre your honor, maid me 
a young man agayen, and caussyd me to entter upon this great 
charge agayen with hart and courage. And thereupon, her 
Majestie gave me her hand to kysse it; and I exsepttid this 
graat charge.” 

No sooner was Gresham reinstated in office, than his services 
were put in requisition. In the begining of December, 1558, he 
was despatched to Antwerp, to assure the merchants of that 
town of the validity of all outstanding obligations; to buy am¬ 
munition, and to take up some additional sums; for the repay¬ 
ment of which the City cheerfully gave their bonds. His com¬ 
mission assigned to him, as usual, an allowance of 20 s. per diem, 
“and for the time he hath been in the realme, since his last 
coming over, 1 3a*. 4 d. by the day; the declaration of the dayes 








SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 149 

he hathe been here to be taken by his own oathe.” On the 23d 
he received a communication from the council, ordering him to 
take up a further sum; all which he accomplished, and returned 
to England again before the close of the year. 

On Elizabeth’s accession, he addressed to her a very long 
letter, in his usual quaint style, on his favourite subject— 
finance; a question which, even by the best informed at that 
time, was very imperfectly understood. He sketched what he 
conceived to be the Queen’s best financial policy, closing his 
address as follows:— 

“An it please your majestie to restore this your reallme into 
such estate as heretofore it hath bene— 

“First. Your hygnes hath none other wayes, but, when 
time and opertunyty serveth, to bringe your base money into 
fine, of xi ounces fine. And so, gowlde, after the rate. 

“Secondly. Not to restore the still-yarde to their usorped 
privelidge. 

“Thirdly. To grant as few licences as you can. 

“Fowerthly. To come in as small debt as you can beyond 
seas. 

“Fiftly. To keep your credit; and specially with your owne 
marchants, for it is they who must stand by you, at all eventes 
in your necessity.” 

On this subject of finance, also, he addressed the following 
letter to Sir William Cecil, on the 1st of March, 1559 : 

“It maye like your hounor to^understande, that xxx m li. 
sterling, aftyr xxiijs. iiijr/., maketh Flemyshe xxxiiij M viii C 
xxxiij li. vis. viiic?. (£34,833 6s. 8d.); and aftyr xxiis. (as the 
Exchange now goeth in Lombarde-street,) xxxiij m li. wych ys 
the lialfe of the Quene’s majestie’s detts that be owing in Aprell 
and May next. And for the payment thereof, and for keeping 
uppe of the Exchange, the Quene’s majestie hathe none other 
wayes and helpe but to use her merchant adventurers; wherein 
I doo right well knowe they will stande very stowte in the matter, 
by the reason of this new costome, as also for the xx m li. that 
her hyglines doth owe them. Nevertheless, considering how 

















SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


150 

moche yt doth import the Quene’s majestie’s credit, of force she 
must use her merchants; and for the compassing thereof, her 
liighnes shall have good opportewnity both to bargain and to 
bringe them to what price her majestie and yow shall think most 
convenient; as the like proof was made in Kinge Edwarde, her 
late brother’s time. 

“First. Yt is to be considered that our Englishe marchaunts 
have at the least 1 or lx M cloths and kersys lying upon their 
hands, reddy to be shipped, whiche they will begynne to ship 
when they shall knowe to what pointe they shall trust for their 
custome. 

“ Secondly. This matter must be kept secreat, that yt maye 
not come to the marchaunt’s knowledge that you do intend to 
use them; and to laye sure wait when their last daye of shipping 
shall be, and to understand perfectly at the customer’s hands, at 
the same daye, whether all the cloths and kerseys be entyred, 
and shipped, and water-borne. And being once all water¬ 
borne, then to make a stay of all the fleete, that none shall 
depart till further the Quene’s Majestie’s pleasure be known. 

“ Thyrdly. That being once done, to commande the customer 
to bring you in a perfect book of all such cloths, kerseys, cotton, 
lead, tynne, and all other commodities, and the merchantes’ 
names : particularly what nomber every man hath shipped, and 
the just and total sum of the whole shipping. And thereby you 
shall know the nomber, and who be the great doers. 

“ Forthely. Apon the view of the customers booke, you shall 
send for my Lord Mayre, Sir Rowlond Hill, Sir William Garrat, 
Sir William Chester, Mr. Alldyrman Martynne, Mr. Alldyr- 
man Baskefyld, Lyonell Dockat, William Bowrde, Rowland 
Heywood, Waltyr Marller, Harry Becher, and Thomas Ryvet; 
and move unto them that, ‘ Whereas you have shipped to the 
nomber of A. B. wyche be ready to depart to the mart, so it is 
that the Quene’s Majestie ys indetted in Flanders for no small 
some ; for the wyche, you, my Lorde Mayre, and the cytty, do 
stand bound for the payment thereof. And for that yt shall 
apere unto you that her highness ys not unmindful for the pay- 








I 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 151 

ment of the same, she hath thought good to use you, (as here¬ 
tofore King Edward, her brother, dyd) ; whereby the Exchange 
may he kept up and raised, and to inrich this realme of fine 
gold, here to remain ; as likewise we may have our commodities, 
and forrayne, at some reasonable prices. Whereby you mer¬ 
chants maye flourish in the commenwell, as heretofore you have 
done. And for the accomplyshment of the premises, the Quene’s 
Majestie dowthe requyreat your hands to paye in Flanders xxs. 
sterling, upon every cloth that ys now shipped, after the rate of 
25s. Flemish lor the pound sterling ; and her highness shall 
paye you here again at double usans. Which sum must be paid 
in Antwerpe ; the one tliyrde part the fyrst of May, one tliyrde 
part the 20th of May, and the other tliyrde part the last of 
May/ 

“ Upon the utterans hereof, they will grant nothing, till that 
they have assembled the Company together. Now, having all 
their goods in the Quene’s power, there ys no doubt but that 
her Majestie shall bring them to bargaine, at such reasonable 
price, as you, and the rest of my lords, shall think convenient: 
wherein you may quallify the price of the exchange as you 
shall think most meetest; whereby they may be the better 
willing to serve hereafter ; considering how much the Quene’s 
highness is indebted unto them alreddy. Giving your honour 
to understand I doo not so much press upon the great price, as 
I do at this present to bring them to make offer to her highness 
to serve at some reasonable price. 

“ Finally. You maye not come lower than to have for every 
pound sterling xxiis. Flemish (for so the exchange passith at 
this present.) Butt I trust yt will be at 22s. 6d. ere they have 
fynyshed their shipping. Advertysing you, yf the exchange be 
better in Lombard Street than 22 s. in any wise, to make them 
paye after that rate ; or ells they do no service, but for their 
own lucar and gayen, wiche in no wise I mil not have them 
accustomed unto at the Quene’s Majestie’s hands. 

“To conclude, eftsoons, yf you can bring them to 22s.; and 
yf the exchange be better, according as the exchange goeth to 
















152 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


pay there, at the days aforesaid, and here at double usance, 
(which ys two months ;) it wolle prove a more benyfycyall 
bargayn to the Quene’s Majestie, and to this her realme, than 
I will at this present molest you withall; for it will raise the 
exchange to a onnest price. As for exsampell: the exchange 
in Kinge Edwarde’s time (when I beganne this practisse) was 
but 16^. Dyd I not raise it to 235. and paid his whole detts 
after 205. and 225. ? Whereby wool fell in price from 2Qs. 8 d. 
to 165. and cloths from lx li. [£60] a packe to xl and xxxvi li. 
a packe, wythe all other our commodities, and forrayners ; 
whereby a nomber of clothiers gave over the making of cloths 
and kerseys. Wherein there was touched no man but the 
merchant, for to serve the prince’s turn ; which appeared to the 
face of the world that they were great losers ; but to the con¬ 
trary, in the end, when things were brought to perfection, they 
were great gainers thereby. . 

“Fifthly. What bargain soever you do conclude with the 
marchants, to remember specially that they doo paye their mony 
in vallewyd money, (otherwise termyd permissyone money,) for 
that the Quene is bounde to pay yt in vallewyd money ; wyche 
maye not in no wyse be forgotten. For it may chansse to cost 
the Quene iii or iiii li. apon every hundred powndes to come by 
the vallewyd money—soche scarsetty there ys thereof; wyche 
in the sales of our commodytes wolle cost the marchants nothing; 
for that they maye sell their commodytes to pay in permissyone 
money, for the some they shall paye for the Quene, wyche wolle 
not be xx5. permyssione money upon every cloth. Which 
matter, move not to the merchants until such tyme as you have 
bargayned and agreed upon the exchange ; that being done, it 
maye not be forgotten.” 

In March, 1559, Gresham was again sent to Antwerp by the 
Queen, it being his second visit after her accession, a period of 
only four months. His instructions, which bear date on the 5th, 
direct him to postpone the payment of a moiety of the Queen’s 
debt beyond seas for a period of six months ; and to obtain from 
King Philip (who remained in Flanders for some time after 















SIR TIIOMAS GRESIIAM. 


153 


Mary’s death,) a passport, which might enable him to carry into 
England two hundred barrels of saltpetre. After some diffi¬ 
culty, and by urgently pressing his suit at Brussels, he managed 
to fulfil his commission. The next instructions he received were 
to put over, if he could, for three or six months the money owing 
to the merchants by the Queen ; and if he found this impracti¬ 
cable, to take up money in order to pay her creditors. This 
was on the 10th of April, and soon afterwards he returned to 
London. He, however, went again to Antwerp, in September, 
taking with him £10,000, to pay, in part, the most urgent of 
the Queen’s creditors there, and we find him at home again in 
the beginning of November. 

The troubles of the Low Countries, during this period, seem 
to have had a large share of Gresham’s attention ; and, in fact, 
to have caused his employment in a new capacity, for we find 
that after Philip had quitted Flanders, with a view to taking up 
his abode in future in Spain, it was resolved by the British 
government to send an ambassador-resident to that court; and 
Sir Thomas Chaloner, who had represented Great Britain in 
Flanders, was selected to fill that important post, Gresham being 
sent over as ambassador at the court of the Duchess of Parma, 
regent of the Netherlands. It was on the occasion of this 
honourable and important mission, and when he was preparing 
to enter upon the duties which it entailed, that the honour of 
knighthood was conferred upon him ; for though in the instruc¬ 
tions with which he was furnished preparatory to his departure, 
(bearing date the 20th December, 1559) he is termed “esquire,” 
the knightly style is observed in an official document under his 
hand, which was written on the 23rd of the same month. 

At this period, Sir Thomas Gresham’s residence was in 
Lombard Street, which was then the handsomest street in 
London; and, like all other bankers and merchants living therein, 
he kept a shop, and over his door was his crest, a grasshopper, 
by way of a sign—a practice by no means uncommon at that 
day in London. The original sign of Gresham’s shop is said to 
have been in existence so late as 1795 ; when, on the erection 
























154 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


of the present buildings, it disappeared from the station which 
it had so long occupied. After having received the honour of 
knighthood, however, (a distinction in that age, to wliich a 
similar honour at the present day is by no means equivalent,) 
Sir Thomas Gresham seems to have begun to look out for some 
other place of residence, and to think of leaving his house in 
Lombard Street to the care of his apprentices ; for we are told 
that such an abode was considered unfitting the dignity of a 
knight. He fixed on the, at that time, aristocratic locality of 
Bisliopsgate Street, where, after a year or two, a mansion arose 
to which he gave the name of Gresham House. But it must 
not be hence inferred that Gresham led a life of inglorious ease, 
or that he devoted even any large share of his time to matters 
of a mere domestic nature. His services to his sovereign re¬ 
quired his almost constant attention, and we find that he dis- • 
charged the duties of his exalted office of ambassador with his 
accustomed ability and success. It is to be borne in mind that 
in addition to these duties he had also that of Queen’s merchant 
to attend to. On his first ambassadorial visit, for example, he 
was commissioned to take up for the space of a year, and 
transport to England, the sum of £200,000 ; “ to send over 
the remainder of the armour and stores in his custody ; and to 
purchase five hundred shirts of mail.” 

After about a month passed in Antwerp, he returned home, 
in the beginning of February, 1559-60 ; but it was only for a 
few days ; since on the 25 th of the same month we find him 
taking his departure from London, and writing, as follows, to 
Queen Elizabeth :—“ It may please your excellent majestie to 
understand that for the better profe to your highness for the 
conveyance of such bullion and gold as I shall provide for you, 
I have sent you this letter enclosed in the stone-work ; being 
no small comfort unto me that I have obtained to the knowledge 
thereof, for the better conveyance of your treasure. Which 
thing must be kept as secretlie as your Majestie can devyze; for 
yf it should be known or perceived in Flanders, it were as much 
as my life and goods were worth.” It may be presumed from 


















SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 155 

this that he had discovered some extraordinary mode of con¬ 
veying to England with secrecy the treasure he was commis¬ 
sioned to procure in Flanders. Being a farewell letter, also, 
he commended Lady Gresham to Queen Elizabeth in these words : 

“ I shall most humbly beseeclie your highness to be a comfort 
unto my poore wife in this my absence in the service of your 
Majestie.” 

His letters, after his arrival at Antwerp, on this occasion, 
mention the personal danger which his commission obliged him 
to incur, the merchants there having conceived the idea that 
it was his intention to rob them of all their fine gold and 
silver ; “ by reason whereof,” he writes to Mr. Secretary Cecil, 

“ I will insure you I am half afrayde to go abrode, but only at 
the owres of the burse tyme.” From April, 1560, to March, 
1561, Gresham resided almost permanently in Flanders, which 
was then in a very unsettled state, besides which, it became 
evident that Philip of Spain was preparing to aid the French 
king to subdue the Scots. These circumstances called forth 
all Gresham’s energies, for he had great difficulties to contend 
with in the execution of his commissions, one of which was to 
purchase military stores to a large amount and forward them to 
London. The progress he was making in the fulfilment of this 
object, forms, in fact, the theme of all his letters for a consider¬ 
able time ; for his operations, which were conducted upon an 
immense scale, not only gave full occupation to himself, but 
also to the numerous agents who were constantly employed in 
his service in different parts of Flanders and Germany. In 
every letter he enumerates how many “corselets, dags, and 
hand-guns,” he had been shipping, besides saltpetre and sul¬ 
phur; until, at last, weary with the slow progress he was making, 
he begs to be allowed to adventure military stores to the value 
of £3000, on one bottom, from Hamburg,—from which port 
he says, that in liis day not more than ten ships sailed in the 
course of the year. In these days, it would appear, that gun¬ 
powder was not made in England at all; for Gresham, in one of 
his letters, after alluding to its scarcity in Flanders, and the 














156 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


great difficulty he had in procuring it, says, “ The Queen’s 
Majestie should do well to macke out of hand iiij or vi my lies 
for the macking of powder for the service of her highness’s 
turne.” Gresham frequently gave similar advice to Sir William 
Cecil, showing how inadequately England was then provided 
with the means of aggression, and of defence, and how dependent 
she was on foreign states for those resources which her native 
energies have since abundantly supplied. 

During his protracted periods of absence from England, 
Gresham ever and anon expresses his concern for the welfare of 
his wife—so quaintly noticed in a passage already quoted. “ I 
shall most humbly beseech your highness,” he said, addressing 
Queen Elizabeth, in 1560, “to be a comfort unto my poore 
wyfe in this my absens in the service of your Majestie and 
similar passages are of frequent recurrence in his correspondence 
with Secretary Cecil and Sir Thomas Parry, to whom he, alter¬ 
nately, either recommends her ladyship, or returns thanks for 
the kind attentions which she had experienced at their hands. 
On one occasion, happening to address Cecil, at five o’clock in 
the morning, from Dunkirk (where he had just arrived after a 
very rough passage) Gresham concludes, “ with my most humble 
commendations to my Lord Keeper, and to my Lord Robert, so 
that my poore wyfe be not forgotten—whom I will insure you 
was very sorrowfull to see me depart afore my account was 
fynished : therefore I shall most humbly beseech your honour, 
according to your promis, to be a stay and some comfort unto her 
in this my absence.” “ I shall desire you,” he says elsewhere, “ to 
have me in remembrans for the getting owglit of my pardone, and 
that it may please you to dely ver yt to my powre wyffe; which will 
be no small comforte unto her.” And in a letter to Sir Thomas 
Parry, we find, “rendering you my most humble thanks for your 
gentill letter ; as also for the gentilness showd to my poore wyfe, 
who likewise would gladly have me at home.” Sometimes, too, 
the letters of this ancient merchant, record, however imperfectly 
the on dits of his day, more particularly the rumours which at 
that time were prevalent in Flanders concerning the marriage 













SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


157 


of Queen Elizabeth, to which event Gresham more than once 
alludes. But, notwithstanding these lighter matters were fre¬ 
quently noticed, they occupied but little of his time, which was 
engrossed by the care of providing military stores for England, 
and providing for their safe transportation ; a matter, as it 
would appear, of paramount difficulty and danger. His corres¬ 
pondence, during the year 1560, furnishes numerous proofs of 
the great hazards which he ran, in providing England with 
those implements of warfare which a few years later she turned 
to such good account. It is, of course, needless to observe, that 
in serving the state, which he represented, he was acting in 
direct violation of the laws of the Low Countries, and incurring 
their severest penalties ; so that, in order to mislead a casual 
reader, should any of his letters have been intercepted, in his 
correspondence with Cecil, he conventionally made use of the 
word velvet to denote gunpowder ; and employed other terms, 
as silks, damasks, and satins, in the same enigmatical manner. 
The following extracts from his letters will show his position : 

“ I have secreat advertisements by one of the serchers, how 
the courte here hathe geven order to the customers that all 
soche shipes as lade for England should be searched; whych ys 
only to tacke me in a trip, as I am credibly enformyd. I can 
no more wryte yow in this matter; but well fares that peny 
geven, that saves one hundred ! I had thought to have shipped 
in this tlote of shipes, (whyche be to the nomber of x or xii 
shipes) all the Queene’s Majestie’s corseletts, morrious, and 
corries,* that be remayning in this towen ; but now I will 
staye till this brownte be past. In the last shipes that went 
from hens, I sent you x pieces of velvets, viz., v pieces of dobbill, 
and v pieces of pill and halfe; and for that yow write me 
yow undyrstand not what velvets should be, (and hoping that 
Candiller could inform you thereof, wherein I stand in dought,) 
you shall undyrstand that every piece of doble geyne velvet 
is one thousand pounds weight of corriu powddyr ; and one 
piece of velvet of pill and a halfe ys 1 m lbs. weight of serpen- 

* Probably cuirass is entended. 

























158 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

tine powdyr.” “Sir, yow must neades devyse some wayes 
whereby the tliyngs tliat be sent from hens maye be secreatly 
conveyed to the tower ; or ells in soch matters I shall not be 
able to stand her highness in small stead from hence.” In 
June, he says, “ according as I have written your honour, I 
have corrupted the chief searcher, whom is all my doer, and 
who hath right honestly desired a worthy reward ; soe by him, 
and through his advice, I am doing daily, as by my proceedings 
to you may appere. If it is discovered, there is nothing short 
of death with the searcher, and with him who enters it at the 
custom house. So that there shall no shipe depart, but I shall 
give the adventure of 3 or 4 pieces of velvets in a ship.” 

Notwithstanding Gresham’s precautions, and his repeated 
injunctions that the greatest possible secrecy should be ob¬ 
served at the tower, the periodical arrivals of large quantities of 
ammunition did not fail to attract notice ; and the intelligence 
soon found its way to Antwerp. To use his own words, he 
was now “holly at this wites’ ende.” “For as the xiiij th daie 
[of June, 1560] at vij of the clocke at nyght, the cheiffe 
sercher, (whome is all my worcker, and conveyer of all my 
velvets,) gave me to understand that there had bynne a Inglish 
man wytli the customer, and hadd informyd him that of late, 
I hade manny velvets aryvyd at London of all sortes ; and that 
yf he made a general serche now, he shulld finde a great bootye. 
Wyche matter, the customer oppenyd to the searcher, (my 
frynde,) and comandyd him to be wythe him as the xvth daie, 
very erely in the mornyng; whereas all the costomers and he 
was together in conssaylle. And the matter being longe de- 
battyd, they conclewdyd not to macke no serche ; for if they 

shude serche and fynde nothing, it wold redoWen moclie to 

• 

there disonnestyes ; and they sayde amonges themsellffes, that 
I colde not tacke it iii goode parte at there handes, consideryng 
how benefyciall I have allways bynne unto them. The sercher 
allegyde they had reason ; and that, from tyme to tyme, as the 
goodes was ladynne, he tocke a view of all the shipes lading. 
Wyth that, said the undyr costomer,—‘ This Inglishman maye 










SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 159 

doo this of mallyse; for that I knowe that Mr. Gresham ys not 
best belovyd amonges the merchants, for the service a doth to 
the prince and so at this instant they have concluded that 
nothing should be done. Sir, if any thing should be serched 
and found, the parties that shipped this year for me must flye 
the countrie till their end be maid ; for it runs their goodes 
and all their lives upon. I am promesed by the sercher to have 
the Inglishman’s name.” 

The letters whence these passages are extracted, also con¬ 
veyed intelligence of the writer’s progress in the shipment 
of military stores. “ The shipes wherein was ladyn the xxx 
peases of vellvettes, and vi c ells of crymmesyne velvets ; ix 
c lxx c ells of black damask, wyth ij c lx ells of crymmesyn 
satyn, be departed from hens without any sercher; wyclie dothe 
amount to the sum of £2,500, trusting in God that they have 
all arrived safe. Most humbly beseaching your honnor that 
there may be all the secreasy used that may be, for the ressev- 
ing thereof into the tower; wysliing there were no man privey 
thereunto, but only M. Blomefylld, whome ys a very honnest, 
secreat gentleman, and syrcomspect in all his doinges. And 
doughtless this matter cannot be too secreat kept; considering 
the great care and adventore it is in transporting it from hens.” 
Shortly after, he announces a further shipment of “ velvets ;” 
and adds, “to-morrowe I doo intend to lade 15 pieces of velvets 
more, and 1000 ells of black damask; so that I trust you shall 
lack no more of that kind of silks.” By this jargon it will 
be remembered that a certain quantity of ammunition was 
signified. 

Financial matters, too, his favourite theme, occupied a large 
portion of his thoughts at this time; and the subject of the 
exchanges is largely dwelt upon in his correspondence with 
Cecil; in one of his letters to whom, after referring to what had 
been the effect of his measures in King Edward’s time, when 
the exchange was raised from 16s. to 23 s. 4 d., whereby all 
foreign commodities had been greatly cheapened, and all Christ¬ 
endom robbed of their fine gold and silver, he says, “ Sir, if you 










160 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

will enter upon this matter, you may in no wise relent, by no 
perswasion of the merchants. Whereby you may kepe them 
in fere and in good order; for otherwise if they get the bridell, 
you shall never rewle them.” And further on he adds, “ I 
wolde that presentlie, the Quene’s Majestie sholde give licence 
to our Inglish merchaunts to ship ; for the sooner they doo 
begyn, the sooner they will be laden; and for licence of long 
cloths, the Quene’s Majestie to grant them liberally, and to let 
them suffer another way. Sir, this matter is of so great import¬ 
ance, as it must be kept secret; for if the merchaunts have 
any inkling thereof they will never ship their goods, but des¬ 
patch them otherwise.” To conclude with this practice, “First, 
you shall raise the exchange, to the inching of the Quene’s Ma¬ 
jestie and the realme for ever. Secondly, you shall diffraie 
the Quene’s Majestie’s debt. Thirdly, you shall advance the 
Quene’s homeward credit in such sorte as you shall astonny 
King Philip and the French King, which matter is of so great 
importance for the Quene’s Majestie’s honnor, and for the profit 
of her realme, that I cannot expresse unto you ; but refer me 
to the sequalle thereof, which shall trie all things: which I have 
atteyned unto by experience and proofe thereof.” 

The refining of the currency was another topic upon which 
Gresham wrote, and this it appears, was, if not at his suggestion, 
at least with his concurrence, carried very secretly into effect; 
so secretly, indeed, that no man knew when it was about to 
happen. 

By this time some idea may be formed of the nature and 
extent of the services which were continually required of Sir 
Thomas Gresham. It will be perceived that he discharged the 
duties not only of an agent, negotiating loans for the state, and 
of Queen’s merchant, in which capacity the task of furnishing 
the country with military and other stores continually devolved 
upon him ; but that he corresponded with Sir William Cecil, as 
the ambassadors at foreign courts were accustomed. Antwerp 
was then, in short, what London is now—the centre of intelli¬ 
gence; so that, in addition to Flemish news, Gresham conveyed 











SIR THOMAS GRESHAM, 161 

home the freshest intelligence respecting the Pope, derived from 
Rome, Naples, or Venice; respecting “the Turk,” derived from 
Constantinople or Tripoli ; Spanish news, from Seville or 
Toledo ; and not least often, tidings of what was passing, or 
rumoured, in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, and France. In 
truth, the very best proof of the opinion which was entertained 
of his abilities by Queen Elizabeth and her ministers, is 
afforded by a mere inspection of the Flemish correspondence of 
the period during which he flourished, about the time of which 
we are speaking : for instance, there are hundreds of his letters 
in existence, and but very few by any other hand; so incon¬ 
siderable a number, indeed, as scarcely to deserve mention,— 
and even most of these relate or are addressed to him. This 
establishes beyond contradiction the fact, that in conducting 
the policy of England towards Flanders,—a state which 
formerly occupied a far prouder walk among European powers 
than it does at the present day,—Cecil depended altogether on 
the information furnished to him by Sir Thomas Gresham. 
How Gresham obtained his information, or what “ delicate 
stratagems” he made use of, it is not necessary to inquire ; it 
is evident, however, that to compass the ends he had in view, 
he did not scruple to obtain the co-operation, subserviency, or 
connivance of persons in office by a bribe, or any other means 
within his power. 

Not altogether on strangers, however, did Gresham depend 
for his intelligence. There is abundant evidence of the activity 
of his disposition, and the personal exertions he constantly made 
to accomplish his objects. Often during his present protracted 
sojourn beyond the sea, he was found writing from Brussels 
and other towns in Flanders where he judged his presence 
desirable. On such occasions the only mode of travelling was 
by post horses, and in one of his hasty journeys he met with a 
fall, by which his leg was broken. This was in October, 1560, 
and the accident appears to have been serious, for he continued 
lame ever afterwards. 

Gresham seems to have returned to London in March, 1561, 

M 
















162 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

after an almost unbroken absence of eleven months, during nine 
of which he had vainly petitioned for permission to visit home. 
Whilst he was thus detained abroad, he lost, by death, his elder 
brother, Sir John Gresham, who died some time in the year 1560. 

After remaining in England only until the month of August, 
Gresham was again despatched into Flanders, whither he 
proceeded in order to receive £30,000 of the merchant-adven¬ 
turers, to pay a portion of the Queen’s debt, and to persuade her 
creditors to postpone for a year the liquidation of the sums due 
in November and December. His stay was of about two 
months duration, and his correspondence during that time is of 
the ordinary character. He returned to London in October, 
and remained there until the end of the ensuing February. 
On new-year’s day, 1562, Gresham presented Queen Elizabeth 
with £10 in angels, enclosed “in a purse of black silk and 
silver, knyttfor which he received in return, twenty-four 
ounces of plate—in the shape of “oune guilt cup with a cover.” 
Lady Gresham, whose offering was “ a boxe, with foure swete 
baggs in it,” received a smaller gift in return. 

The active mind of Gresham seems at this time, to have 
been as much on the watch as ever for opportunities to benefit 
the State; and we cannot wonder at the esteem in which he 
was held, when the number and importance of his services are 
considered. During his long residence at Antwerp, however 
successful he had himself been in evading them, he had wit¬ 
nessed the superiority of the custom-house regulations in that 
city, over those of the same establishment in London ; and he 
now wrote to his factor at Antwerp, Richard Clough, desiring 
him to obtain complete information as to the system pursued in 
b landers, and to communicate to him the result of his inquiries 
in writing. Clough’s reply to Gresham extended over more 
than twenty sides of folio paper, and entered into the details 
of the custom-house with the utmost minuteness. One passage 
in his letter, as bearing upon a project long a favourite of 
Gresham’s, we extract:— 

“ I wryte this muche unto your mastershippe to put you in 











SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 163 

rememberanse that when tyme shall serve, you maye breake 

• 

some of these matters to Mr. Secretary : for in dede it is 
marvell that wee have so gude orders as we have, consydering 
what rulers wee have in the sittey of London ; suclie a com- 
panny that do study for nothing ells butt for their own profitt. 
As for insampell; consydering what a sittey London ys, and 
that in so many yeres they have nott founde the menes to make 
a bourse ! butt must walke in the raine, when ytt raineth, 
more lyker pedlers than marcliants ; and yn this countrie, and 
all other, there is no kynde of pepell that have occasyon to 
meete, butt they have a plase meete to that pourpose.” 

The result of these inquiries and of this correspondence 
produced, after a few years, a great change in the customs 
department, which was attended by an enormous increase in the 
revenue. 

In March 1562, Gresham was once more at Antwerp, to pay 
some of the Queen’s bonds, and to renew others ; his stay, 
however, was very short on that occasion, but he again left 
London in July following. In the intervals between his 
journeys he busied himself in superintending the building of his 
house in Bishopsgate-street. The troubles in the Low Countries 
were in the meantime greatly on the increase ; nevertheless 
Gresham’s visits, on account of the Queen’s debts, and the 
mercantile speculations in which he was engaged, were paid 
with great regularity—his complaints of some “ unmanageable 
creditors ” being neither few nor small. 

While in England he seems to have resided for a large 
portion of his time at Intwood Hall; which, however, at the 
suggestion or wish of his lady, he exchanged for that of 
Osterley, at which place he dwelt until the completion of his 
mansion in Bishopsgate-street. In 1564 he lost his only son, 
Richard, an event which was to him a very heavy calamity. 

We now come to the period when Gresham succeeded in 
bringing forward his favourite project—the erection of a 
“ burse ” or exchange. 

On the 4th of January, 1564-5, a proposal was made to the 

m 2 









1 64 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

court by Sir Thomas Gresham, (through his servant Anthony 
Strynger,) that a Burse or Exchange should be built in London 
at his expense for the accommodation of merchants, provided a 
site was found on which the edifice might be conveniently 
erected. There is no doubt that this spirited proposal was 
the result, in a measure, of the domestic calamity which its 
author had just before experienced ; and that he sought by 
this- means both to employ usefully a portion of the wealth 
which he must then have regarded as a superfluous acquisition; 
and to divert the melancholy which the bereavement itself was 
so naturally calculated to inspire. 

The want of such a building was at that time severely felt in 
London. Hitherto, Lombard-street had been used for this 
purpose : and here “ the merchants and tradesmen, as well 
English as strangers, for their generall making of bargaines, 

contracts, and commerce,.did usually meete twice 

every day,”—at noon, and in the evening : “ but their meetings 
were unpleasant and troublesome, by reason of walking and 

talking in an open narrow streete,.being there 

constrained either to endure all extreamities of weather, viz. 
heat and cold, snow and raine; or else to shelter themselves in 
shoppes.”* “ How the Exchange passeth in Lombarde-street,” 
is a phrase of frequent recurrence in Sir Thomas Gresham’s 
early letters; as well as the words “every streete,” which re¬ 
quire no explanation. 

At how remote a period this locality acquired its name is not 
known; but we are informed that Edward the Second, in 1318 
or 19, “confirmed a messuage sometime belonging to Robert 
Turke, abutting on Lombard-street towards the south, and 
towards the Cornhill on the north, for the merchants of 
Florence; which proveth that street to have had the name of 
Lombard-street before the reign of Edward the Second:” that 
is to say, its antiquity is carried back as far as the close of the 
thirteenth century ; at which period it was a place of resort 

* Stowe’s Chronicle, ed. 1631 , p. 668. 














SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 165 

for foreign merchants.* It was so called from the Italian 
traders who first settled in this metropolis, and probably made 
that street their favourite haunt: for, with the same laxity of 
expression that the term 4 Indians ’ is used by ourselves at 
the present day, our ancestors, by the general appellation of 
Lombards , designated the merchants of the four republics of 
Genoa, Lucca, Florence, and Venice. These early traffickers 
succeeded and supplanted the Jews as money-dealers; having 
obtained a footing in this country as agents for such of the 
Italian clergy as enjoyed benefices in England. The latter 
were unable to draw the produce of their livings without the 
intervention of the Lombards ; who, sometimes in specie, and 
sometimes in wool, made their remittances. Far oftener, how¬ 
ever, this was done by bills of exchange : and from this small 
beginning arose the gigantic trade, whose incalculable results now 
surround us on every side. The connexion with Rome just glanced 
at, will suffice to explain the meaning of the following passage in 
Stowe; who gives us to understand that the customary ‘feat of 
merchandise ’ was not exclusively performed in Lombard-street* 
44 As the merchants,” says he, 44 met here for traffick, so the 
Pope’s merchants also chaffered here for their commodities; and 
had good markets for their Wafer-cakes sanctified at Rome, 
their Pardons, &c. For so I read in an old book printed anno 
1545: 4 This fine flour have they made the chiefest of all their 
trish-trash. I pray thee, gentle reader, were not his Pardoners , 
merchants to them ? Yea, it is well known that their Pardons , 
and other of their trumpery, hath been bought and sold in 

Lombard-street.as thou wilt buy and sell a horse 

in Smithfield.’ ” 

We are told that as early as the year 1534 or 5, the practice 

of assembling here had been found inconvenient, and that the 

« 

* In the year 1296, Pope Bonifice III. recommended to Edward the 
First’s protection certain merchants of Lucca coming over. (Fmdera, 
vol. ii. p. 705.) These were Lombards. Anderson says they came out 
of Italy before 1274, (vol. i. p. 406.) 












166 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM* 

citizens liacl frequently deliberated in common-council on the 
propriety of transferring their place of resort to some more 
convenient locality. By royal letters addressed to them in the 
same year, Leadenhall had been proposed as a building adapted 
to their purpose ; but whether from attachment to the street, 
(in and about which it is probable that many of the principal 
merchants resided,) or from that proneness to resist innovation, 
even in a small matter, which, fortunately, does not yet seem 
altogether extinct among us,—from whatever motive, the pro¬ 
posal was rejected by a show of hands. Nor was Sir Richard 
Gresham more successful, four years after, in accomplishing his 
spirited scheme for the public benefit; though he wisely attended 
to the prejudices of his fellow-citizens, and proposed to erect his 
‘ goodely Bursse ’ in the very spot which had hitherto been the 
scene of their meetings. In truth, it rarely falls to the lot of 
those who first devise any great project, to live to see their 
plans carried into execution. 

The time for the erection of a Burse had, however, at last 
arrived: the merchants and citizens, says Stowe, “had already 
had many thoughts and counsels ” on the subject,—being, doubt" 
less, most powerfully moved thereto, by the necessity which 
had now become apparent of taking some such decided step, 
in consequence of the immense number of merchant-strangers, 
whom the troubles in the Low Countries and in France had 
driven to London: and when Sir Thomas Gresham came for¬ 
ward with the munificient offer to defray the expenses of the 
building, provided a site was found to build upon, a subscrip¬ 
tion was readily entered into for the purpose, and the ground 
on which the Exchange now stands was conveyed to him. 

Out of respect to the chronicler who showed the greatest 
partiality to the city of London by preserving the memory of 
its antiquities, and recording the names and actions of its 
worthies, the brief narrative Avhich he has left of the preceding 
occurrences shall be here inserted : reserving for a subsequent 
page the details which it would be improper to produce, unti^ 
the progress of our story suggests their insertion. 








SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


1G7 


“In the year 1566,” says Stowe,* “certaine houses upon 
Cornhill, and the like upon the backe thereof, in the warde of 
Brodestreete, with three allies, the first called Swan-alley 
opening into Corn-hill ; the second called New-alley, passing 
through, out of Cornhill into Brodestreete warde, even against 
S. Bartilmew Lane ; the third called S. Christopher’s alley 
opening into Brodestrette warde, and into S. Christopher’s 
parrish ; conteynning, in all, foure score householders,—were 
first purchased by the citizens of London for more than £3,532, 
and were solde for £478 to such persons as shoulde take them 
down, and carrie the stuffe from thence. Also the ground, or 
plot, wars made plaine at the charges of the citie, and then 
possession thereof was by certaine aldermen, in name of the 
whole citizens, given to Sir Thomas Gresham, Knight, Agent 
to the Queene’s highnesse, thereupon to builde a burse, or place 
for merchants to assemble in, at his own proper charges : and 
hee on the seventh of June laying the first stone of the founda¬ 
tion, being bricke, accompanied with some aldermen, every of 
them laid a piece of gold ; which the workemen tooke up, and 
forthwith followed upon the same with such diligence, that by 
the monetli of November in the year 1567, the same was 
covered with slate, and shortly after fully finished.” 

It seems that the edifice was stuccoed over in imitation of 
stone. A huge grasshopper, we find, was stationed over each 
of the four corners of the building ; and the crest of the 
founder also surmounted a lofty Corinthian column, which 
was placed outside the north entrance, overlooking the quad¬ 
rangle. It is remarkable, however, if this column really 
existed, that the only trace of it should be supplied by an 
engraved view; for it must have been a conspicuous object, 

* Survey, ed, 1754, i. 475.—The Ironmonger’s Company subscribed £75 
towards the purchasing of the site. This was in 1565. [Herbert’s History, 
&c. i. 121.] In Stowe’s Chronicle, (ed. 1631, p. 668,) it is stated, that 
“ upon good advice, the citizens of London bought divers times houses and 
tenements in Cornehill, and pulled them done, and made the ground faire 
and plaine to build upon; the charges whereof cost them above £5000.” 






















168 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


commanding an extensive view of tlie environs of London; 
and, like the Monument, sufficiently capacious to accommo¬ 
date observers on its summit. The grasshopper was also to 
be seen glistening on the summit of the square tower beside 
the south entrance, ; and as Bishop Hall has recorded in one 
of his satires, where he draws a picture of “ the brain-sick 
youth 

“ And now he plies the news-full grasshopper, 

Of voyages and ventures to inquire. 

The Burse was supported on arches, having covered walks, 
and being adorned with statues of several of the sovereigns 
of England, as already mentioned. It had also, as was 
the case up to the period of its recent destruction, a sta¬ 
tue of Sir Thomas Gresham near the north end of the 
western piazza, —the date of the erection of which is not 
known, but there occurs a Latin epigram on the subject in 
a little volume of poems published in 1629; and it is a re¬ 
markable fact, which was noticed and recorded at the time by 
several writers, that when, in the great fire of 1666, the 
Exchange was consumed, and statues of the kings displaced 
by the violence of the conflagration, that of Sir Thomas Gres¬ 
ham, the founder, alone retained its station uninjured. “ The 
Exchange, a sad sight,” says the communicative Pepys in his 
Diary, under 5th September, 1666; “nothing standing there 
of all the statues or pillars, but Sir Thomas Gresham’s picture 
in the corner.” A similar observation was made by Mr. John 
Evelyn, Edward Waterhouse, T. Vincent, Samuel Rolle, and 
others. 

The interest which Richard Clough took in this undertaking, 
may be inferred from the sentiments he had already expressed 
on the subject in 1561; and Fuller would have us believe, that 
he was something more than a zealous promoter of the work. 
“ There want not,” says that amiable writer, “who will avouch 
that some thousands of pounds were disbursed by him for the 
# building of the Burse, or Royal Exchange;” and it must be 


















SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 169 

owned, that liis expressions in the letter we have elsewhere 
quoted are in favour of Fuller’s story, though other evidence 
is altogether wanting to substantiate the fact. 

“ The form of the building,” says a contemporary writer, 
“is quadrate, with walks round the mayne building supported 
with pillars of marble; over which walkes is a place for the 
sale of all kinde of wares, richly stored with varietie of all 
sorts.” Hentzer, the German, when he visited England in 
1598, was evidently struck with its appearance. “It has a 
great effect,” says he, “ whether you consider the stateliness of 
the building, the assemblage of different nations, or the quanti¬ 
ties of merchandise.” There were, in fact, walks above as 
well as below; the upper part of the building being divided 
into no less than one hundred small shops, from the rents of 
which Gresham proposed, in part, to reimburse himself for his 
outlay in its erection. An equal number of vaults were also 
dug beneath, adapted for the reception of merchandise ; but 
these were found to be so dark and damp, that they soon became 
of little value. 

Desirable for the display of wares as a shop must have been 
in a place of so much resort as the Burse, we learn from the 
chronicler who interested himself most in the history of the 
city, that for two or three years after its erection the shops 
remained c in a manner empty.’ Queen Elizabeth, however, 
having signified her intention of visiting the founder, and in 
person inspecting and naming his edifice, Gresham naturally 
became anxious to improve its appearance, and render it fittei 
for the reception of his royal guest. “ He went, in con¬ 
sequence, says Stowe, “twise in one day round about the 
upper pawne, and besought those few shoppe-keepers then 
present, and they would furnish and adoine with waics, and 
waxe lights, as many shops as they either could or would, and 
they should have all those shops so furnished rent-free that 
yeere; which, other wayes, at that time was forty-shillings a 
shoppe by the yeere : and within two yeres after, he raysed 
that rent unto'foure marks a yeere; and within a while after 









170 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


that, liee raised his rent of every shoppe unto four pounds 
tenne shillings a yeere, and then all shoppes were well 
furnished according to that time ; for then the milliners or 
haberdashers in that place solde mouse-trappes, bird-cages, 
shooing-horns, lanthorns, and Jewes-trumpes, &e. There was 
also at that time that kept shoppes in the upper pawne of the 
Royall Exchange—armorers, that solde both olde and new 
armor, apothecaries, booke-sellers, goldsmiths, and glass-sellers; 
although now it is as plenteously stored with all kinde of rich 
wares and fine commodities, as any particular place in Europe. 
Unto which place many forraine Princes dayly send, to be served 
of the best sort.” 

It was in consequence of the season of the year at which 
Queen Elizabeth made her progress into the city, that Gresham 
required the aid of illumination to set off the Burse to advan¬ 
tage. Stowe relates, that on the 23rd of January, 1570-1, 
“the Queen’s Majesty, attended with her nobility, came from 
her house at the Strande, called Somerset-House, and entered 
the citie by Temple-bar, through Fleete-streete, Cheap, and so 
by the north side of the Burse, to Sir Thomas Gresham’s in 
Bishopsgate-streete, where she dined. After dinner, her Ma- 
jestie returning through Cornhill, entered the Burse on the 
south side ; and after that she had viewed every part thereof 
above the ground, especially the pawne, which was richly fur¬ 
nished with all sorts of the finest wares in the city, she caused 
the same Burse by an herralde and a trompet to be proclaimed 
the Royal Exchange , and so to be called from henceforth, and 
not otherwise.”—Such is the brief account which has been 
transmitted to us of the event from which the Burse, as it was 
till then called, dates its present name, by one who was pro¬ 
bably an eye-witness of the scene he describes. The only 
other contemporary notice to be met with of this memorable 
passage in the annals of the metropolis, occurs in the accounts 
of the churchwardens of St. Margraret’s, Westminster ; where 
it is recorded that the bell-ringers were paid 4 d. “ for ringing 
when the Queen’s majesty went to the Burse^” and 8 d. “ for 


















SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


171 


ringing when the Queen’s majesty went to Sir Thomas Gres¬ 
ham’s, and came back again.” 

In the collection of MSS. bequeathed by Bishop Tanner to 
the Bodleian library, is a Latin play in five acts, which bears 
the following title :—“ Byrsa Basilica, seu Regale Excambium 
a Sereniss : Regina Elzabetlia in Persona sua sic Insignitum ; 
anno Dom : 1570. Mense Januar : 23° die Monumentum Mer- 
curiale D. D. Thomse Greshami Militis et Negotiatoris Regii; 
Qui suis solius sumptibus e solo erexit ; dicavitq. tam Mercatori 
quarn Mercurio.” This M S. is bound in vellum, and extends 
over ninety-five folio pages. The dramatis personce are twenty 
in number ; ‘ Rialto,’ who stands foremost on the list, being the 
impersonation of Sir Thomas Gresham himself ; while Mercury, 
who is not considered as one of the actors, pronounces the pro¬ 
logue and epilogue. The scene is laid in the Royal Exchange, 

“ Augustae Trinobantum,” i. e. of London : and at the end occur 
these words,—“ Hoc Meum Vivum, I. Rickets” 

The penmanship of this piece is fantastical in the extreme, 
and the style of composition insufferably ridiculous. Oblivion 
has displayed such partiality towards the author, that it has 
spared us nothing beyond his name ; and this account of a 
play hitherto unnoticed, is inserted merely because, viewed in 
connexion with the subject before us, the fact of its existence 
is curious. The piece appears to be of a date contemporary 
with the event which it is intended to celebrate ; and to judge 
from the style of the binding, &c., may have been a present 
from the author to ‘ Rialto ’ himself. 

There is besides extant, an indifferent play by Thomas 
Heywood ; which, as it describes the building of the Burse, and 
refers in every page to Gresham, must not pass unnoticed in his 
Life. It is in two parts, and bears the following titles :—•“ If 
you know not me, you know nobody ; or the troubles of Queen 
Elizabeth,” 4to. 1606.—“ The second part of Queen Elizabeth’s 
troubles. Doctor Paries treasons : The building of the Royall 
Exchange, and the famous victory in ann : 1588.” 4to. 1609. 
Not that this drama is of any importance in a biographical 











172 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

point of view ; for so many of its incidents are decidedly fabu¬ 
lous, that the authenticity of the rest may reasonably be sus¬ 
pected : but it is interesting, inasmuch as it probably embodies 
some of the popular traditions concerning Sir Thomas Gresham 
which were current thirty years after his death ; and shows 
what marvellous tales of his wealth and extravagance obtained 
credit with the vulgar, at a time when many to whom he was 
personally known must have been yet living. Heywood has 
followed Stowe’s narrative very faithfully till the queen comes 
to visit Gresham, and name the Burse ; but here the poet can 
no longer restrain his invention. Gresham purchases a pearl, 
which no one else could afford to buy, and, in imitation of Cleo¬ 
patra, drinks it, reduced to powder, in a cup of wine :— 

“ Here fifteen hundred pound at one clap goes ! 

Instead of sugar, Gresham drinks the pearl 

Unto his queen and mistress : pledge it lords !” 

It is enough, however, to have alluded to the existence of 
this play. That Gresham drank a carouse to the queen is not 
unlikely : but there is no reason for believing that the royal 
merchant was addicted to such royal draughts as Heywood 
describes. The incident was probably borrowed from the his¬ 
tory of Sir William Capel, of whom a similar story is related by 
Fuller in his Worthies. 

The Exchange, when it was first erected, was a favourite 
resort of the citizens, and soon became a customary lounge for 
idlers of every description; thus partaking of the nature of 
St. Paul’s Cathedral, where it is well known that formerly as 
many bargains were made as there had ever been sermons 
preached. That this was the case with the Royal Exchange 
at a later period, can be illustrated by many apt quotations; 
but the following extract from the Inquest book of Cornhill 
Ward, bearing the early date of 1574, shows that the evils 
recently complained of were coeval with the building itself:— 
“ The Exchange was presented for that uppon the Sondaies 
and holy daies there mete greate number of boyes and child¬ 
ren, and younge roges; who, as well in the forenoone as in the 








SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


173 


afternoone, make such shoutinge and hollowinge, that neither 
the honest citizens who walke there for tlieire recreation can 
quietly walke, nor one heere another speake ; neither can the 
parishioners in the church of St. Bartliolomewe, near adjoyn- 
inge to the Exchange, or such others as come to the sermonds ; 
therefore we most humbly praye that the same may be re¬ 
dressed.” 

The following more enlarged account of the erection of this 
interesting edifice, together with that of Gresham College may 
not be unacceptable in connexion with the life of the founder 
of two buildings, which through successive centuries have 
exercised so important an influence in the mercantile and 
literary history of the first city in the universe. 

On the 4th of January, 1564-5, as already stated, Gresham’s 
proposition was signified to the court of Aldermen, by his ser¬ 
vant Anthony Strynger ; and thankfully acceded to by them. 
They agreed that Sir Thomas should employ such strangers 
about the making of the said Burse, as he might think proper: 
and entrusted certain of their number with the task of fixing 
on a commodious site for its erection. These persons were to 
make their report to the Lord Mayor and the Aldermen on the 
following Sunday, at 8 o’clock, in the chapel of St. Paul’s 
church, where they were in the habit of assembling before 
sermon time. So strong was the attachment of the citizens, 
in those days, to their accustomed haunt,—Lombard Street, 
thas it was determined, on the present occasion, that the fittest 
place for a Burse would be the ground between that street and 
Cornhill: and it was resolved (on Monday, 8th Jan.,) that the 
Merchant Tailors’ Company should be petitioned for leave to 
pull down the mansion house in which Alderman Harpur 
resided, and some other houses adjoining, for the purpose of 
obtaining a commodious site. To this scheme it is obvious that 
some obstacles were raised ; for it was abandoned, and in six 
weeks a negotiation was opened with Dean Wotton for the very 
ground on which the late Exchange stood.—It is time to state 
that Alderman Rowe, Gresham’s kinsman, took a leading 















174 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


part in these negotiations; and at eight o’clock in the morning 
of the 23rd July, was waited on in his mansion-house in 
Bishopsgate-street, by the wardens of the twelve principal 
companies, 1 who had been summoned for the express purpose 
of entering into arrangement for facilitating the erection of 
the Burse. In the December following, the benevolence and 
aid of the Merchants Adventurers and Merchants of the Staple, 
beyond the sea, was solicited with the same object. A copy ol 
the letter which was addressed to them (dated January 1565-6) 
has been preserved ; and is very curious. The sum therein 
specified and required, was 400 marks ; to be paid within two 
months. 

At Christmas 1565, warning was given to the inhabitants to 
the houses which it was proposed to remove in order to erect 
the Burse, to vacate their dwellings before the ensuing 25th of 
March ; that is to say, before New Year’s day, old style ; 
Jeoffrey Walkeden and Thomas Banister being appointed to 
negotiate with the several householders, and talk with them. 
Precepts were issued, in the mean time, to the wardens of the 
several companies, for levying contributions in aid of the pur¬ 
chase of the intended site. Mr. Alderman Jakeman was chosen 
treasurer; and Sir Thomas White, Sir William Garrard, Sir 
William Chester, Sir John White, Alderman Rowe, commis¬ 
sioners for the undertaking. It was settled that by the ensuing 
month of May, (1566), all should be ready for the workmen 
“ to fall in hand with the foundation thereofand that the 
Burse was to be fifty-five yards in* length, and forty-five in 
breadth : to extend from Walkeden’s alley to Jaques’ house, 
—a “ litle old house in Corneliill,” inhabited by a widow, which 
“ the cytie was driven to bye ” for one hundred marks. These 
arrangements bear date 7th January, 1565-6. 

On the 9th of February following, £ Sir Thomas Gresham 
being at the house of Mr. John Ryvers, alderman, in company 
with Sir William Garrard, Sir William Chester, Thomas Rowe, 
Lionel Duckett, German Ciol, and Thomas Bannister, most 
frankly and lovingly promised,’ that within a month after the 













SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 175 

% 

Burse should be fully finished, he would present it, in equal 
moieties, to the city and the Mercers’ Company. In token of 
his sincerity, he thereupon gave his hand to Sir William Gar¬ 
rard ; and in the presence of his assembled friends, drank a 
carouse to his kinsman Thomas Rowe. How rarely do ancient 
documents furnish us with such a picture of ancient manners ! 

Thirty-eight houses, of which some seem to have been cot¬ 
tages, a store-house, and two gardens, were demolished in order 
to make room for the Burse ; and of these, thirteen tenements, 
the store-house, and one of the gardens, which was called 
4 Canterbury Garden,’ belonged to the Dean and Chapter of 
Canterbury, and was purchased for 600/. Hence the negotia¬ 
tion with Dean Wotton, already noticed. The city finally paid 
to the proprietors of the soil for the whole number of houses, 
208/. 6s. 8d. : to the tenants, for their leases, 122/. 14s. : and 
in legal and other expenses, 100/. 16s. 6d. : making in all 
3502/. 17s. 2d. 

The householders, forty-six in number, who occupied the 
site of the Burse, seem for the most part to have been cloth- 
workers and drapers. When the site on which it was intended 
that the edifice should stand, had been made clear, the length of 
the area from east to west on the Cornhill side, was found to 
be 161 feet 6 inches ; and on the Broad-street side, 118 feet 
6 inches. From Cornhill to Broad-street on the Swan-alley 
side, was 198 feet; and on the New-alley side, 149 feet 6 
inches. 

Towards defraying the expenses which had been incurred, the 
city possessed 204/. 3s. 4c?. in unpaid contributions, &c. The 
materials of the old houses were sold for 478/. 3s. 4c?. ; and 
twenty of the principal companies contributed 1685/. 9s. 7c?. 
The list of 738 persons by whom this amount was subscribed, 
in sums varying between 10s. and 13/. 6s. 8c?. is very interesting. 
Among the Mercers (whose contribution amounted to 296/. 
6s. 8d.) we recognise Sir Thomas Leigh, Sir Richard Mallory, 
Roger Martyn, William Allen Allen, and Lionel Ducket, 
alderman, who gave 10/. each. John Marsh, 5/.; John Gres- 







176 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


ham, 61. 13s. Ad. ; John Fizwilliams, 3/. 6s. 8 d. ; John Isham, 
51.; Geffrey Duckett, Al.; Edmund Gresham, 51. ; Nicholas 
Lewson, 3/. 6s. 8 d.; Henry Isham, 3/.; William Lewson, 3/.; 

William Dansey, 30s.—Among the Drapers, (who subscribed 

» 

144/.) we have Sir Richard Campion, Lord Mayor 13/. 6s. 8 d.; 
and Sir William Chester 10/.—Among the Grocers, (who gave 
281/. 18s. Ad.) we recognise Sir John White 13/. 6s. 8 d. ; and 
among the Goldsmiths, (who contributed 74/. Is. 8c/.) Sir Mar¬ 
tin Bowes, 13s. 6s. 8 d .—Among the Merchant Tailors, (whose 
subscription amounted to 183/. 3s. Ad.) Sir Thomas Offley, 10/.; 
Sir William Harpur (the founder of Bedford free-school, 51.; 
Alderman Rowe, 10/. ; Sir John York 61. 13s. Ad.; and among 
the Haberdashers, (who gave 175/.) Sir William Garrard, 10/.; 
and Mr. William Bond, 51.; John Nor den, scrivener, sub¬ 
scribed 20s. 

On the 13th September, 1566, an account was rendered by 
Thomas Rowe of the proceedings of the commissioners up to 
that day : by which it appears that, at that time, their receipts 
had about equalled their disbursements. Previous to that event, 
however, we meet with a curious entry, showing that the brick 
layers of the city had been guilty of many misdemeanors, “ both 
in words and deeds,” towards Sir Thomas Gresham ; jealous, 
probably, of the foreigners whom he had begun to employ on 
his edifice. The foundation-stone Gresham had laid with his 
own hands on the 7th Juue, 1566: and it was on the 13th that 
it was resolved by the aldermen, to petition him in favour of 
the English workmen. Whether they were successful in their 
suit, does not appear ; but it probably did not much dispose 
Gresham in favour of the candidates for employment, that one 
William Crow, apparently a bricklayer, had been guilty of 
“ very lewde demeanour towards ILenrick, the said Sir Thomas 
Gresham’s chief workman.”—The only hint respecting the 
appearance of the Burse supplied by the documents from which 
we are quoting, relates to the pillars ; which are declared to 
have been “ playne .... not carved, or otherwise curiously 
wrought.” 









SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 177 

When the queen paid her memorable visit to Sir Thomas 
Gresham, in January 1571, the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, 
and all the companies of the city were ordered to receive her 
in their liveries: ‘standing in their accustomed places, hereto¬ 
fore used for the like purpose.’ 

Immediately after the death of the Lady Gresham, the Royal 
Exchange, of which the revenues amounted to the clear yearly 
value of 7511. 5s., reverted to the Corporation of the city of 
London and the Mercers’ Company: a patent from the Crown, 
bearing date the 3rd February, 1614, (12 James I.) confirming 
them in their possession of this property. It is a curious cir¬ 
cumstance, that many years before this transfer took place, 
indeed immediately after Gresham’s death, the Royal Exchange 
was declared to be in an unsound condition. We learn this 
from the Inquest-book of Cornhill Ward, where it is stated 
that, so early as the year 1580, the Royal Exchange was pre¬ 
sented as “ dangerous for those which walk under; part beinge 
broken and like to fall downe.”—[Angell’s Historical Sketch of 
the Royal Exchange, &c. 8vo. 1838, p. 14.]: and two years 
after, a frequented part of the same building, “ by the insuffi¬ 
ciency of the workmanship thereof, and want of good stuffj” 
was pronounced “ gretely defective, and very perilous to the 
walkers thereunder. In such wise as the mayne free stones of 
the arches thereof have fallen, and a great parte of the same 
arches are reddy to fall, to the great danger of the lives of per¬ 
sons, younge and old, daily walkinge thereunder, and resorting 
to the same Exchange.” Also, at a certain grate, “ right over 
against the south dore of the said Royall Exchange, in the 
middle of the streete and common passage thereof, is a greate 
hole, which of long tyme hath so contynued, to the great 
danger, hurt, and losse of life and limb, and mayminge of both 
men and beast, and other comon passers thereby ; as namely, 
the foot of a horse slip’t lately therein, a man being on his 
back, to the greate danger of the horse’s legg, and of the legg 
of the man by the fall of the horse. Sithens which, an ox 

legg fell therein, and thereby was broke in two.” Again, in 

N 










178 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


1598, the south and south-west ends of the Exchange were 
presented as “cracked, and dangerouslie decayed.” k rom all ol 
which passages it would appear that the old Exchange was im¬ 
properly constructed : whether it was built too hastily, of in¬ 
different materials, or in an unskilful manner, it would be 
hopeless at this distance of time to discover, and useless to 
discuss—one thing is quite clear, it was not one of the sub¬ 
stantial edifices of the present day. 

N o tli wi tli st an ding the preceding evidence we have the testi¬ 
mony of Mr. John Evelyn and others, to the imposing appear¬ 
ance of the Exchange after it had been erected upwards of 
seventy years. “ I do not look upon the structure of the Ex¬ 
change to be comparable to that of Sir Thomas Gresham in 
our city of London,” says Evelyn, writing from Amsterdam in 
1641 ; “yet in one respect it exceeds, that ships of consider¬ 
able burden ride at the very key contiguous to it.” He writes 
from Paris in the same strain :—“ I went to the Exchange : 
the late addition to the buildings is very noble, but the gallerys 
where they sell their petty merchandize are nothing so stately 
as oui's in London , no more than the place where they walk 
below, being only a low vault.” Even the associations which 
the Rialto must have awakened, failed to seduce him from his 
allegiance to the city of London. He writes from Venice in 
June, 1645—“ I went to their Exchange, a place like ours, fre¬ 
quented by merchants, but nothing so magnificent.” Contempo¬ 
rary with Evelyn lived Samuel Rolle, a clergyman ; who has left 
the following account of this edifice as it appeared in his day. 
“How full of riches,” he exclaims, “was that Royal Exchange! 
rich men in the midst of it, rich goods both above and beneath! 
There men walked upon the top of a wealthy mine; considering 
what eastern treasures, costly spices, and such like things were 
laid up in the bowels (I mean the cellars) of that place. As 
for the upper part of it, was it not the great storehouse whence 
the nobility and gentry of England were furnished with most 
of those costly things wherewith they did adorn either their 
closets or themselves ! Here, if any where, might a man have 




SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 179 

seen the glory of the world in a moment. . . . What artificial 
thing could entertain the senses, the fantasies of men, that was 
not there to be had ? Such was the delight that many gallants 
took in that magazine of all curious varieties, that they could 
almost have dwelt there, (going from shop to shop like bee 
from flower to flower,) if they had but had a fountain of money 
that could not have been drawn dry. I doubt not but a Malio- 
medan (who never expects other than sensual delights) would 
gladly have availed himself of that place, and the treasures of 
it, for his heaven, and have thought there were none like it.” 
[Burning of London, &c., part iii. medit. ix. p. 47.] 

Overcharged as this picture may be, it is nevertheless a curi¬ 
ous fact, that for many years before and after Rolle wrote, the 
Exchange was resorted to from all parts of London and the 
country, for the purchase of the necessaries as well as the ele¬ 
gancies of life. Stowe says that it obtained the appellation of 
the Eye of London. The upper walk, or Pawne as it was called, 
was frequented by gallants and ladies of fashion, and must have 
resembled, both in nature and appearance, a modern bazaar ; 
which will not appear so strange when it is remembered that at 
that time, Barbican, the Minories, and the purlieus of Smithfield 
were inhabited by the first nobility of the land. Donald Lup- 
ton, in a little work called “ London and the Countrey carbonaded 
and quartred into severall characters,” published in 1632, says 
of the Exchange—“ Here are usually more coaches attendant 
than at church doors. The merchants should keep their wives 
from visiting the upper rooms too often, lest they tire their 

purses by attiring themselves.There’s many gentlewomen 

come hither, that, to help their faces and complexion, break 
their husbands’ backs ; who play foul in the country with theii 
land, to be fair and play false in the city. [12mo. pp. 157. 
Harl. Miscell. by Park, 1812, 4to. vol. ix. p. 315.] 

It had been the subject of an express proclamation, from the 
foundation of the Burse, that no person frequenting it should 
wear any kind of weapon ; an order which was renewed in the 
year 1579, “with addycion, that no person or persons shall 

N 2 





180 


SIR TIIOMAS GRESHAM. 


betwixt Easter and Mychelmas, use to walke there after the 
howre of tenne of the clocke at night; and betwixt that and 
Easter after nyne, upon payne of ymprysonmente.” The lower 
part of the Royal Exchange, in fact, was not only a place of 
rendezvous for merchants, but, as we have already noticed, soon 
became a favourite lounge with the citizens ; and its piazzas, 
like the aisles of St. Paul’s cathedral, the habitual resort of 
newsmongers, and idlers of every description, “ Sum tymnes,” 
says an old writer, “the prowde and loftie do walke there to be 
sene in their heyglit and braverie, as well as others of good 
degre, bothe men and women, spend an hower there for neces- 
sitie of recreation.” Bishop Hall [Satires, book vi. sat. i.] thus 
describes 

“ Tattelius, the new-come traveller, 

With his disguised coat, and ringed ear, 

Tramping the Bourse’s marble twice a day.” 

Other old satirists have aimed a shaft in the same quarter. The 
author of the “Letting of Humours Blood in the Head Vaine,” 
for instance, paints an exceptionable character dropping “ into 
the Reall Exchange and ITayman, in his “ Quodlibets,” [1628, 
p. 6.] has the following epigram “ To Sir Pierce Pennilesse,” 
in which he evidently means to be severe upon the needy 
loungers who frequented Paul's and the Exchange: 

“ Though little coin thy purseless pockets line, 

Yet with great company thou’rt taken up ; 

For often with Duke Humfray thou dost dine, 

And often with Sir Thomas Gresham sup.” 

Our picture would be incomplete were we to omit to avail our¬ 
selves ol one or two graphic hints supplied by the Inquest-book 
of Cornhill Ward. It informs us, that in 1590, “ Certain women, 
maidens, and others, were presented for selling of oranges, 
apples, and other things at the Exchange-gate in Cornhill, and 
amusing themselves in cursinge and swearinge, to the great 
annoyance and greif of the enhabitants and passers by:” and 
that William Grimbel was presented in 1594, “for keepinge 












SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 181 

typlinge in tlie vaults under the Exchange, and for broylinge of 
lierringes, sprotts, and bacon, and other thinges in the same 
vault; noysome to the merchaunts and others resortinge to the 
Exchange.” It was probably in order to abate the former nui¬ 
sance that an injunction was issued in 1607, “that noe manner 
of fruite, save only orenges and lymonds, shall be sold hereafter 
at either of the gates or passages.” In 1622, complaints were 
made of the “ greate abuse and annoyance done before the south 
gate of the Royall Exchange, especially at the Exchange tyme, 
by the standing there of rat-catchers, sellers of doggs, birds, 
plants, trees, and other thinges, to the greate annoyance and 
trouble of merchants, gents, ladies, and others, resorting as well 
to the Exchange, as to the pawnes above the Exchange.” 

But to the motley group which the preceding extracts enable 
us to picture assembled in and about this edifice, a character 
must be added, without which the scene would lack its most 
grotesque feature. When a bear-baiting was about to take place, 
the bear-ward previously paraded the streets with his bear, to 
excite the curiosity of the populace, and induce them to become 
spectators of the sport. On these occasions the animal was 
usually preceded by a minstrel or two, and carried a monkey or 
baboon upon his back. That the Exchange should have been 
overlooked by such a peripatetic is not to be expected : accord¬ 
ingly, we find presented, “ The disturbance and annoyance used 
by the beare-wards in bringing their beares, doggs, and bulls 
before the Exchange in Cornhill, and there making proclama¬ 
tion, commonly at the Exchange time, to the drawing together 
of tumult, and other inconvenience.” 

There is extant a very scarce work by John Payne, printed 
at Haarlem in 1597, and bearing the following title : The 
“Royall Exchange ; [dedicated] to suche worshipfull Citezins, 
Marchants, Gentlemen, and other occupiers of the contrey as 
resorte thervnto.” Under this promising name we have a trea¬ 
tise very little to our purpose ; for the author, with a pious 
motive, had recourse to the not uncommon expedient, of dis¬ 
guising his real intention of preaching a homily, by prefixing 








182 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

an attractive title to his exhortatory pages. He is the first 
writer, however, who hints at a source of scandal which was 
afterwards broadly commented upon by les s cautious pens. “In 
the upper sliopps,” he says, “as there be honest men and 
auncient matrons that occupie substantiall and profitable wares 
to the benefite of the buyers, so ys yt otherwyse of the rest 
reported. But because men love better gentle admonitions 
than bytter umbradings, therefore I wyshe bothe yong men and 
reputed virgins there to wynn credit to the hows and to them¬ 
selves, by desert of better fame then is abrode; and to be no 
less honest and chaste yong men, sober damselles and virgins, 
indede and in proufe, than they are in face and shew, for to 
stop the mowthes of such yll reporters; eschewinge levitie and 
wantonnes, with the pride of hart, gate, and apparell; and not 
to sitt ydlie and gasinge about, but eyther liavinge leysure to 
be profitablie readinge, or as the apostle sayethe, to labor and 
worck sum good thing with their handes, for their own behoufe 
and others.” 

The Royal Exchange was utterly destroyed in the great fire 
of 1666; on which occasion it was noticed by a shoal of con¬ 
temporary writers as a curious incident, that the statue of Sir 
Thomas Gresham, which had been erected in a niche at the 
northern extremity of the west piazza, was the only one which 
escaped the destructive influence of the conflagration. “ When 
the fire was entered,” says a contemporary writer who undertook 
to describe the catastrophe, “ how quickly did it run around the 
galleries, filling them with flames; then, descending the stairs, 
compasseth the walks, giving forth flaming vollies, and filling 
the court with sheets of fire ! By and by, the kings fell all down 
upon their faces, and the greater part of the stone building 
after them, (the founder’s statue alone remaining,) with such a 
noise as was dreadful and astonishing.” “ Sir Thomas Gres¬ 
ham’s statue,” says Evelyn, “though fallen from its niche, re¬ 
mained entire when all those of the kings since the Conquest 
were broken to pieces.” Samuel Rolle, a clergyman, who, in 
1667, “improved ” the “ Burning of London,” “in one hundred 





SIR THOMAS GRESIIAM. 183 

and ten Discourses, Meditations, and Contemplations,” (after 
sundry digressions “ concerning the nature of fire,”—“ concern¬ 
ing the true cause of conbustibility,”—“touching the nature 
of sulphur,”—and so forth,) devotes a whole chapter to “ the 
statue of Sir Thomas Gresham left standing at the old Ex¬ 
change ;” showing “ how great and particular a respect did 
the fire shew to the effigy of that worthy knight.” [Part iii. 
p. 188, medit. 51.] 

On the 2nd of November, 1666, Mr. Hook, Mr. Mills, and 
Mr. Jerman, the city surveyors, were requested to prepare an 
estimate for rebuilding the Royal Exchange. In the following 
February, (15th), the joint committee of the Corporation and 
the Mercers’ Company ordered the ground to be cleared, and 
on the 25tli agreed to petition Charles II. for an order to obtain 
Portland stone. To this petition the king was pleased to accede; 
but the committee conceived themselves to be so much indebted 
to Sir John Denham, his majesty’s surveyor-general of his works, 
for having furthered their suit, and in other ways assisted them, 
that on the 16th December, 1667, expecting a visit from him 
on the following Wednesday to view the Exchange, and streets 
adjoining, they made “provision of six or eight dishes of meate 
att the Sun tavern, to interteyne him withal and agreed “ to 
present him with thirty guiney peeces of gold, as a token of 
their gratitude.” 

Still, though the Gresham committee met frequently, no pro¬ 
gress was made in the main object, viz. the rebuilding of the 
Exchange. The fact seems to have been, that the extraordinary 
calamity which had reduced the metropolis to a heap of ruins, 
afforded so much occupation to the city-surveyors, that between 
the “ overmuch businesse of Mr. Mills, and some dissatisfaction 
in Mr. Jerman,” the month of April, 1667, came to a close, 
without any material steps having been taken in furtherance of 
the object of the committee. On the 25th, however, unanimous 
choice was made of Mr. Jerman for undertaking the work : next 
to Mr. Mills, he was pronounced to be “ the most able known 
artist ” that the city then had ; and the former architect having 










184 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


declared himself too busy to perform the work alone, Mr. Jerman, 
“ after much reluctancy and unwillingness, objecting it might be 
thought an intrencliment upon Mr. Mills his right,” yielded to 
the solicitation of the committee, and entered at once upon his 
duties. 

Jerman’s design for the new building being completed, and 
the royal approbation of it obtained, together with permission to 
extend the south-west angle of the new Exchange into the 
street,' the building (of which the need was severely felt) was 
immediately proceeded with : and the foundation-stone was laid 
on the 6th of May, 1667. On the 23rd of October, Charles II. 
laid the base of the column on the west side of the north entrance ; 
after which he was plentifully regaled “ with a chine of beef, 
grand dish of fowle, gammons of bacon, dried tongues, anchovies, 
caviare, &c., and plenty of several sorts of wine. He gave 20/. 
in gold to the workmen. The entertainment was in a shed, 
built and adorned on purpose upon the Scotch walk.” Pepys 
has given some account of this interesting ceremony in his diary: 
where we read —“ Sir W. Pen and I back into London, and 
there saw the king, with his kettle-drums and trumpets, going 
to the Exchange; which, the gates being shut, I could not get 
in to see. So, with Sir W. Pen to Captain Cockes, and thence 
again towards Westminster ; but, in my way, stopped at the 
Exchange and got in, the king being newly gone, and there 
find the bottom of the first pillar laid. And here was a shed 
set up, and hung with tapestry and a canopy of state, and some 
good victuals, and wine for the king, who it seems did it.” 

James II., then Duke of York, laid the first stone of the 
eastern column on the 31st of October. He was regaled in the 
same manner as the king had been; and on the 18th of Novem¬ 
ber following, Prince Rupert laid the first stone of the pillar 
on the east side of the south entrance, and was entertained by 
the city and company in the same place. [Journals of the House 
of Commons.] 

The reader, who desires fuller particulars concerning this 
portion of the history of the new structure, may be easily grati- 











SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


185 


fied: but enough has been said for our purpose. It only re¬ 
mains to add that the expenses attending its erection amounted 
to 58,962/.; and that for enlarging the ancient site, 7,017/. 11s. 
were disbursed in addition : making a total expense of 65,979/. 
Us*—The Royal Exchange was opened for the reception of 
the merchants on the 28th of September, 1669, during the 
mayoralty of Sir William Turner ; an event which it was pro¬ 
posed to commemorate in these words, to be engraved on a com¬ 
partment over the south entrance, inside the quadrangle : Ex- 
cambium, hoc , anno 1669, in cineres reductum , in plusquam an¬ 
tiquum splendorem, Prcetore Will’mo 'Turnero, Equite , anno 
1669, restitutum fuit. For this, however, the following in¬ 
scription was substituted : 

“ Hoc Gresshamii Perystyllium, 

Gentium Commercis Sacrum, 

Flammis extinctum 1666, 

Augustius e cinere resurrexit 1679. 

Willo Turnero Milite Prsetore.” 

Thus far of the building of the Burse, or the Royal Exchange, 
for such it became ; the description of which has seemed to 
interrupt in some measure the close thread of our narrative. 
We return now, therefore, to Sir Thomas Gresham. 

Lady Mary Grey, at that time a state prisoner, had been 
under the care of the Duchess of Suffolk ; but in the month of 
June, 1569, she was transferred to the custody of Sir Thomas 
Gresham, and it was during the period of her abode under his 
roof, that Queen Elizabeth visited Sir Thomas, on the occasion 
of naming the Royal Exchange ; and the peculiar relation in 
which she stood to his fair charge, must have rendered the visit 
a remarkable one. The haughty queen, in all the splendour of 
royalty, confronting the fallen Lady Mary, would form a subject 
for a painter. The latter might once have contested with Eliza¬ 
beth the honours of sovereignty ; but her ill-starred family 
had one by one perished on the scaffold, or in prison ; and she, 
the last and youngest, had by a single act of imprudence 
lowered herself from the highest rank to the degree of a common 






















186 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


subject. She was even a prisoner, and the queen’s enmity 
was not to be softened by submission or entreaty. Lady Mary 
may possibly have adopted matrimony as a measure of precau¬ 
tion, in the false hope that nuptials so unambitious in their 
object, would be sufficiently indicative of humility of spirit, and 
would recommend her to the indulgence of the queen. This is 
the view which Fuller takes of the subject. “Frighted,” he 
says, “with the infelicity of her two elder sisters, Jane and 
Katharine, she forgot her honour to remember her safety ; and 
married one whom she could love and none need fear” It was 
probably thus that her mother, Frances, Duchess of Suffolk, 
bartered for security the honours of her ancient house, when 
she ignobly united herself to a commoner, named Adrian Stokes. 

How unwelcome to Sir Thomas Gresham this addition to 
his family was, appears from every page of his subsequent 
correspondence. Henceforth he scarcely wrote a letter, either 
to Sir William Cecil, (who became Lord Burghley in the early 
part of 1571,) or to the Earl of Leicester, without availing 
himself of the opportunity to urge “ the removing of my Lady 
Mary Grey.” In August we find him complaining of the 
burthen; and again in September he concludes a letter of con¬ 
siderable “pith and moment,” with a request “that it may 
pleasse you to doo my most humble commendaceons to my 
Lorde of Leasster, [and] that it may pleasse you bothe to have 
my sewte in remembrans for my Ladye Mary Graye.” At 
the end of a year, the following interesting postscript is 
appended to a letter which was written to congratulate Sir 
William Cecil on his convalescence, and return to court. “I 
have wryttyn to my Lorde of Leassitor to move the Quene’s 
Majestie for the removing of my Ladie Mary Grey, who hathe 
beene with me this xv monthes. I pray you to sett your good 
helpyng hand for the removing of her; for that my wyffe wold 
gladly ryde into Norfocke for to see her olde mother, whoe 
ys iiii xx x [four score and ten] yeres of age, and a very weacke 
woman, not licke to lyve longe.” 

This pleasing trait at once recommends Gresham and his 





























SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 187 

wife to our favourable opinion, and . tends to acquit them of 
unkindness towards their unfortunate and unwilling guest, by 
explaining in some degree the nature of the inconvenience of 
which they complained. Elsewhere, we are told of Lady Gres¬ 
ham s “bondage and harte sorrowe,” which makes it pretty 
evident that the inmate thus forced upon them prevented them 
from disposing ol their leisure, and considering themselves as 
masters of their own movements ; in further proof of which, 
another passage shall be cited, written about the same time, 
and interesting under more than one point of view. The 
allusion at the beginning is to a matter of finance. 

“ Sir, I wolde have waytidd upon you myself for to debate 
this matter at large, and to doo my dewtie unto you ; but that 
it haithe pleased God to vissyte one of my howse at Oyesterly 
of the plague : so that I dare not come to the courte without 
leve. Albeit, I have shut up my howse ; and I and my wife, 
wythe all my howse be at London, and doo inteand wythe the 
Queene’s Majestie’s leve to ryde withe my wife and howsholde 
to my howse at Mayfilde in Sussexe, xxxv myles owt of 
London, if I had dispachid these bondes over. Most humbly 
beseeching youe as to knowe the Quene’s Majestie’s pleasure 
what I shall doo wythe my Lady Mary Gray : trusting that 
now her Majestie wolde be so good unto me as to remove her 
from me, considering that she liaythe now beene wyth me this 
xvi monthes. Other I have not to molest your honour withal, 
but that I have delyvered to one of your masons the iiij pillers 
of collorid marbill, with their furniture in good order. As 
knoweth the Lorde, who preserve you with increase of honnor. 
From London, the xxiind of October, a 1570. 

At your honnor’s commandement, 

Thomas Gresham.’ ? 

Thus far of Lady Mary Grey. We now come to further 

0 

notices of Gresham and the exchange. In the vigour of man¬ 
hood, and when more intent on commercial pursuits, he had 
devoted a portion of his wealth to the erection of a Burse for 








188 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


the convenience of others engaged in the same occupations as 
himself; or, as it is expressed on his bust at Stowe, “for 
carrying on the commerce of the world.” Since the commence¬ 
ment of that undertaking, ten years had now elapsed. The 
founder of the Royal Exchange had lost the intelligent friend, 
in accordance with whose suggestions that edifice had arisen ; 
and to whose active co-operation he was in no slight degree 
indebted for its ultimate and successful completion : he had 
also lived to witness the most flourishing community in Europe 
ruined, and reduced to misery by the arbitary enactments of a 
single individual. Events such as these, may have somewhat 
cooled his ardour for those pursuits which, when a young man, the 
example of his father and uncles had in the strongest manner 
recommended to his attention ; and in the calmer moments 
which he now often passed,—periods of infirmity and con¬ 
finement, or seasons of relaxation from business which he 
had no children to enliven,—he must more than once have 
had occasion to speculate with the eye of a practical phi¬ 
losopher on the vicissitudes of his past existence. He 
had lived during four of the most remarkable reigns which 
have ever succeeded each other in the annals of the English 
history: and his individual experience had taught him how low 
a value is to be set on the common objects which men propose 
to themselves in the higher, as well as in the lower walks of 
ambition. Yet such was the happiness of his moral consti¬ 
tution, that the pictures of the past which his memory brought 
before him, neither soured his temper on the one hand, nor 
filled him with visionary views on the other. The experience 
of a long life had evidently brought him to this simple con¬ 
clusion : that the cultivation of the understanding and the 
education of the heart give birth to the purest pleasures, as 
well as to the most ennobling aspirations; and that the best 
gifts which a state has in its power to bestow on its youthful 
members, are sound learning and religious principles. To the 
accomplishment of this object, as far as it seemed attainable by 
his individual exertions, he now nobly resolved to devote the 



























SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


189 


fortune which he had formerly acquired in his country’s 
service. 

It was, perhaps, towards the close of the year 1574, or the 
beginning of 1575, that he had sufficiently matured his plan 
openly to announce his intentions of founding a college in 
London, for the gratuitous instruction of all who chose to come 
and attend the lectures. Not that the project originated at this 
period—for it is evident that the same, or one very similar, 
had been for a long time entertained by him ; and it would 
seem that he had been once understood to promise that he would 
present 500/. to the university of Cambridge, where he had been 
educated,—either in support of some ancient foundation, or 
towards the erection of a new college. Of this, Alma Mater 
did not fail to remind him ; and the Latin letter which he 
received on the subject from Mr. Richard Bridgewater, the 
public orator, is still in existence. It is dated March the 14th, 
1574-5; and was followed on the 25th of the same month by 
another letter, of which the object seems rather to have been, 
to combat any intention Sir Thomas might have formed of dis¬ 
playing his liberality in London, or at Oxford. London seems 
to have been regarded by Cambridge with peculiar jealousy. 
The foundation of a college in that city would, she apprehended, 
prove prejudicial to the interests of both universities ; and she 
urged as her claim to preference before Oxford, that Gresham 
had himself received his education within her walls. Simul¬ 
taneously with this second letter, the university addressed the 
Lady Burghley, (whose husband was their chancellor), request- 
in cr her intercession with Sir Thomas Gresham, and insinuating 
that it was at that lady’s instance, that Gresham had originally 
promised to endow a college ; which they mention as now about 
to be erected in London, with a yearly revenue of more than 
600/. To the instrumentality here attributed to Lady Burgh¬ 
ley, I we are inclined however to attach little credit, for it rests on 
no better authority than these complimentary letters ; all three 
of which are written in such a fantastical style, and in such 
hyperbolical language, that they can pretend to little weight as 
















190 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


historical documents! It seems probable, indeed, that in erect¬ 
ing Gresham-House, its owner had in view the purpose to which 
it was ultimately to be applied—a supposition which is not a 
little countenanced by its collegiate air ; the great reading-hall 
with which it was furnished; and the distribution of which its 
apartments proved susceptible for every purpose of a college. 
It is however by no means unlikely that so learned and accom¬ 
plished a lady as the daughter of Sir Anthony Cooke, should 
have confirmed the merchant in his high and patriotic resolve 
to confer on his native city the remarkable benefit which he 
now had in contemplation. 

Pressing as were the solicitations with which the university 
of Cambridge assailed Sir Thomas Gresham, he was not to be 
diverted from his purpose. Doubtless his reason for remaining 
firm was, that at Cambridge there were public schools already, 
in abundance ; while in London there existed nothing which 
deserved that name. In the following July he accordingly 
framed his will, and made every necessary arrangement for 
the permanent prosperity of a college, which might be justly 
called ‘the epitome of an university.’ He ordained that the 
Lady Gresham should enjoy his mansion-house, as well as the 
rents arising from the Royal Exchange, during her life, in case 
she survived him; but from the period of her death, both those 
properties were to be vested in the hands of the corporation of 
London and the Mercers’ Company. These public bodies were 
conjointly to nominate seven professors, who should lecture 
successively, one on every day of the week, on the seven 
sciences of divinity, astronomy, music, geometry, law, medi¬ 
cine, and rhetoric. The salaries of the lecturers were amply 
defrayed by the profits arising from the Royal Exchange, and 
were fixed at 50/. per annum;—a more liberal remuneration 
than Henry VIII. had appointed for the Regius Professors of 
divinity of Oxford and Cambridge, and equivalent to at least 
400/. or 500/. at the present day. 

In this enumeration of the seven sciences, it will be ob¬ 
served that Sir Thomas Gresham has assigned to music a very 









SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


191 


distinguished place. Divinity,—at once tlie most important, 
and the most sublime subject on which man can exercise his 
faculties,—stands foremost: astronomy, as the study which in¬ 
troduces him to a knowledge of the heavenly bodies, and most 
admirable of his Maker’s works, naturally follows divinity, and 
occupies the second place : but immediately after these, and 
before the mention of geometry, law, medicine, and rhetoric— 
which are human sciences — music is introduced as of a 
nature so beautiful, that it may reasonably be doubted whether 
it partakes more of earth or of heaven. It will not, perhaps, 
be fanciful to conclude from this circumstance, that Gresham 
was himself alive to the charms of music: be this as it may, 
it is deserving of notice, that although at Oxford and Cam¬ 
bridge music shares in academic honours with divinity, law, 
and medicine—Gresham-college presents the only instance in 
England of an endowed lectureship for the promotion of that 
divine art. 

But a more important inference is deducible from the fore¬ 
going enumeration of the seven sciences which Gresham ap¬ 
pointed to be taught in his college. In an age when the best 
and wisest men were divided on the subject of religion, that 
the sound handling of the science of divinity should have been 
the principal object of his solicitude, is not remarkable. But it 
cannot fail to surprise every one who is at all acquainted with 
the state of learning in England during the sixteenth century, 
that astronomy should stand next in the catalogue ; indeed, 
that it should obtain notice there at all. When we find the 
principal noblemen of that age listening to the dreams of the 
astrologer, and only valuing the study of the stars as they seemed 
capable of revealing the destinies of man, we are no less sur¬ 
prised than gratified to meet with so unequivocal a proof that, 
by Sir Thomas Gresham at least, astronomy was not confounded 
witli the foolish art which resembles it so nearly in name. By 
associating it with divinity and the graver sciences, he showed 
himself aware of its importance ; and probably suspected, if he 
did not foresee, that it it was capable of being made more useful 








192 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


than his contemporaries generally supposed. When he founded 
his lectureship, Copernicus alone had written on the subject of 
astronomy : the science was specifically inculcated neither at 
Oxford nor at Cambridge ; and may be said to have been un¬ 
known in England. 

These preliminaries being settled, Sir Thomas further or¬ 
dained that the professors should all be unmarried men, and 
that separate suites of apartments should be allotted to them 
in his house; while the large garden which surrounded it, and 
the quiet and retirement of the place, he rightly deemed would 
be highly conducive to the comfort, and most favourable to the 
pursuits of the scientific persons who would in future make it 
their residence. But we must now take leave of Gresham 
college, for we shall be obliged to recur to the subject in a sub¬ 
sequent page. It is enough for our purpose to have noticed the 
tone and temper of mind in which Sir Thomas Gresham grew 
an old man ; and to have detected the speculations which 
engaged his thoughts during his declining years. The charita¬ 
ble bequests which he made at the same time, must also be 
reserved for a subsequent page : but it should not longer be 
concealed, that immediately behind his mansion, in the parish 
of St. Peter-the-Poor, he had constructed eight almshouses, for 
the inmates of which he provided liberally by his will. “ In 
witness whereof,” (such are its concluding words,) “ I, the said 
Sir Thomas Gresham, have written this will all with myne 
owne hand ; and to each of the eight leaves have subscribed my 
name ; and to a labell fixed there unto all the eight leaves, have 
sette my seale with the grashopper ; the 5 day of July, in the 
seventeenth yere of the raigne of our soveraigne lady Queene 
Elizabeth ; and in the yere of our Lord God, one thousand five 
hundred and seventy-five.” 

Having thus brought the career of this very wonderful man 
to a final close, we must, nevertheless, recur once more to his 
early history, to show the value at which his eminent services 
were estimated by the respective monarchs whom he had the 
honour of serving. It is well known that during the reign of 








SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 193 

Edward VI. lie repeatedly received from tlie council expressions 
ot their approbation of the manner in which he conducted the 
affairs of the crown. The young king, himself, was so sensible 
of the services this intelligent merchant had rendered him, that 
three weeks before his death he bestowed upon him lands worth 
one hundred pounds a-year ; accompanying the gift with the 
encouraging words, “ You shall know that you have served a 
king.” The saying was princely, and could hardly have been 
suggested by his preceptors ; as some writers are fond of in¬ 
sinuating was the case with every rational thing Edward VI. 
said, and every noble action which he performed. 

In relating this circumstance, Gresham probably alluded to 
Walsingham, and some other manors in Norfolk, granted to 
him by an instrument bearing date six days before King Ed¬ 
ward’s death. But although that young prince has left on 
record his opinion,—“ I think this country can bear no mer¬ 
chant to have more than 100/.,” it is certain that the pre¬ 
ceding was by no means the only instance of bounty which 
Gresham received from his royal master. Westacre-Priory, 
in Norfolk, which was of much greater value, was also be¬ 
stowed upon him in the last year of Edward the Sixth’s reign. 
It is now a heap of picturesque ruins : but Sir Thomas made 
it his residence occasionally; and when he died, the effects were 
estimated at a sum (1,650/.) which proves its internal arrange¬ 
ments to have been as princely, as its external appearance was 
imposing. 

Of his salary it has been already stated that he received for 
liis diet, as it was then called, twenty shillings per day, and 
this was continued, whilst abroad, during the whole of the 
reigns of Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth ; that is, whilst he 
officiated as foreign agent. Compared with the salaries of 
ambassador at the same period, this allowance seems small; 
and in truth, like every other public servant, Gresham re¬ 
peatedly complained that his salary did not defray his necessary 
expenses. In order to form an opinion as to how far twenty 
shillings a-day was a liberal allowance, the reader may like to 

o 









194 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

be informed wliat was tlie 6 diet ’ of other officers of the state 
when sent abroad. Lord William Howard received 61. per 
diem, on proceeding as commissioner into the Low Countries 
in 1558. Sir Thomas Chamberlayne went on his embassy 
into Spain in 1560, with 3/. per diem ; and in 1561 with a 
diet of five marks, or 3/. 6s. 8 d. Cecil was allowed 4/. when 
he was sent into Scotland in 1560; and the diet of Sir William 
Pickering, travelling towards Germany in 1557, was four 
marks, or 21. 13s. 4 d. But then it must be remembered, that 
the contingent expenses of all these persons far exceeded any 
to which Mr. Gresham was exposed. 

In January, 1555-6, Mary bestowed upon Gresham the priory 
of Austin Canons at Massingham Magna, in Norfolk, together 
with several minor benefices. It was to a promise of one of 
these grants that he must have alluded, when, addressing the 
queen on the 27th of October, 1655, he “most humbly besought 
her highness to license him to put her in remembrance of the 
131/. land, that it had pleased her, of her royal goodness, to 
give him, towards the augmenting and stay of his living, for 
the service he had done her Majesty, and for the good service 
he did intend to do her ; which,” he adds, “ shall be no small 
comfort to me, and all my friends.” In another place he says, 
that the lands which Mary granted him amounted, altogether, 
to the yearly value of about two hundred pounds. 

That Gresham, in the midst of his arduous duties, was not so 
thoroughly engrossed as to neglect the refinements of literature, 
is evident from the acquaintance which he formed and kept 
up with the most eminent men of his day. During nearly the 
whole of the reign of Mary, a period of blood and terror, he was 
absent from England, and it is probable that the persecution 
then carried on brought him into contact with a vast number of 
intelligent persons, who were driven by the distracted state of 
affairs at home, to seek for security on the continent; and of 
whom so many found an asylum at Antwerp. One of these 
was John I oxe, the martyrologist, who consoled himself while 
abroad with compiling his laborious Acts and Monuments: the 





SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 195 

biographer of this venerable divine states that Sir Thomas 
Gresham “held him in great account,” and frequently made 
him his alms-giver. 

In June, 1555, he had a visit from Sir William Cecil, who 
mentions in his common-place book that he left Calais, in com¬ 
pany with Cardinal Pole, on the 3rd of June, on his way to 
Antwerp, whence he had returned by the 26th of the same 
month. But besides Foxe and Cecil, great names are not 
wanting at this period, with whom he may have employed 
those intervals of leisure, which, fortunately, even the most 
pressing duties afford. There is reason for believing that the 
celebrated geographer Ortelius was one of the eminent charac¬ 
ters whose friendship he enjoyed: and if Richard Vestegan and 
Richard Rowlands were indeed one and the same person, the 
author of the Restitution of Decayed Intelligence is also to be 
considered as one of his friends.—Nor must we in this place 
omit to notice the poet Churchyard, who found a patron as 
well as an admirer in Sir Thomas Gresham. He mentions the 
latter in more than one of his poems; and it was he who, many 
years after, composed the play and pageant for the entertain¬ 
ment of the queen, when she visited Gresham at Osterley. 
This interesting character was at once a poet and a soldier, 
and passed many years of his eventful and ill-fated life in 
Flanders ; where, doubtless, his intimacy with Sir Thomas 
Gresham began. 

Had a more careful life been written of the celebrated Dr. 
John Caius, co-founder of Gonville and Caius College, Cam¬ 
bridge, we should doubtless have been able to add his name 
to the list of those who occasionally dignified Gresham’s re¬ 
tirement at Antwerp witli their society. In 1556, that eminent 
man published at Louvain a little medical work, which he in¬ 
scribed to Sir John Mason, the English ambassador at Brussels; 
and it is not to be supposed that when in the neighbourhood 
he omitted to visit his prosperous fellow-countryman at Ant¬ 
werp. They were both of an age,—had come from the same 
county — and studied together at the same college. By a 

o 2 






196 SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 

singular coincidence, which Dr. Caius himself records, the 
one was afterwards engaged in the erection of the college 
which bears his name, while Sir Thomas Gresham was watch¬ 
ing the progress of his Exchange. They were kindred spirits, 
and must certainly have been friends. 

There is also the strongest presumptive evidence that a 
friendship subsisted between the celebrated painter Sir Antonio 
More, and the subject of this memoir. They were co-Etonians 
and their intimacy is clearly referable to a period antecedent 
even to the appointment of the latter to the office of Royal 
Agent in 1552—an office which may reasonably be supposed 
to have collected around him all who needed a patron or a 
friend. Gresham sat at least three times to More for his por¬ 
trait: first, in the year 1550—which is the date on a painting 
that used to hang in the common parlour at Houghton, formerly 
the seat of the Walpole family. Horace Walpole characterizes 
this as “ a very good portrait of Sir Thomas Gresham.” It is 
a half-length, and represents him nearly full face, with his 
doublet unbuttoned, and both his hands resting on a table— 
perhaps a counter. He wears on his head, as usual, a black 
cap, and in his right hand holds his gloves; of which latter 
article of dress, by the way, it may not be improper to observe, 
that when introduced into ancient portraits, it is intended to 
denote something significant of the person represented. In 
proof of the high estimation in which embroidered gloves were 
anciently held, Stowe relates that when Edward de Yere, Earl 
of Oxford, many years afterwards brought Queen Elizabeth a 
pair from Italy, she was painted with them in her hands. 

A second portrait of Gresham by Sir Antonio More, is to be 
seen at Titsey-Park, the residence of William Leveson Gower, 
Esq. This picture was the property of the Countess Dowager 
of Northampton as late as 1792 ; when an engraving of it 
appeared. The circumstance of its having originally belonged 
to the Compton family, is not perhaps fancifully accounted for 
by the residence of the three first Earls of Northampton at 
Crosby-place,—in the same parish as Sir Thomas Gresham, 









SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 197 

and immediately opposite his house. This portrait subse¬ 
quently passed into the hands of G. Watson Taylor, Esq., 
and was sold at the Erlestoke sale in 1832, for 42/. It re¬ 
presents a man of mature age, sitting in a chair, clad as usual 
in a solemn coloured suit, with a small cap on his head, and a 
pair of gloves in his right hand. The engraving by Thew 
from this picture, does the original great injustice ; it was 
published in 1722, but has since been re-issued, and the date 
on the plate altered to 1823. 

A third portrait of Gresham by More is also in existence, 
in which is observable the same sober costume as prevails in 
the others, but to which the painter has evidently devoted very 
great labour. 

If, thus to enjoy the favour of one’s sovereign, to possess the 
respect and gratitude of one’s fellow-citizens, and to live in the 
affections of one’s poorer neighbours, can produce happiness, 
then was Sir Thomas Gresham, at every period of his life, a 
happy man. No allusion need be made to his immense posses¬ 
sions,—the common boast of those who have written concerning 
him. It has been feelingly observed, by a more thoughtful pen, 
that the master of many houses has no home; and, in surveying 
any one of his mansions, the want of children must have per¬ 
petually awakened in Gresham’s breast the melancholy reflec¬ 
tion of the venerable Cosmo: “ Questa e troppo gran casa a si 
poca famiglia!” Very few indeed were the inmates of his house 
in London; whereof the apartments were found capable of ac¬ 
commodating some of the most considerable city offices, on the 
occasion of the great fire. With the exception of an occasional 
guest, Gresham-house was inhabited only by Sir Thomas and 
the Lady Gresham; by Gresham’s cousin Nowell; and a large 
retinue of servants: or, if it contained any other inmates, they 
were, probably, the Leads; children and grandchildren of the 
Lady Gresham, by her former husband. Gresham must have 
derived a secret delight, however, from reflecting that, when he 
should be no more, his house would be the seat of learning; and 
that his name would be deservedly dear to the enlightened of 














198 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


all future ages. But we are getting upon uncertain ground, 
with nothing but probabilities to guide us. Fancy may be only 
further allowed to suggest, that the walls of Gresham-house 
must have glowed with many a rare specimen of that school of 
painting with which its owner was most familiar; for it seems 
scarcely possible, that one so wealthy, who had been accustomed 
from his boyhood to reside among artists and the arts, should 
have failed to possess himself of what was no less beautiful than 
easy to be procured. 

At one time, Gresham’s very limited family circle had been 
increased by the addition of a son and a daughter. The son, 
Richard, died in 1564, as before mentioned, shortly before he 
attained to manhood: the daughter lived; but she was not re¬ 
lated to the Lady Gresham, though she bore her name. Anne 
Gresham was a natural daughter, whose mother is said to have 
been a native of Bruges; but as nothing more is known with 
certainty concerning her birth, the circumstance must be left 
in the same obscurity in which we find it. Towards his 
daughter, Gresham made the only reparation in his power, 
by bestowing upon her all the advantages of a careful educa¬ 
tion, and an ample dower. She married into a family of high 
distinction, for she called the great Lord Bacon, brother-in- 
law. Her husband was Sir Nathaniel Bacon, second son of Sir 
Nicholas, the lord keeper, by his first wife, Jane, daughter of 
of William Fernely Esq. of West Creting, in the county of 
Suffolk. Sir Thomas Gresham had married this lady’s elder 
sister; so that his daughter Anne married one who should have 
been her cousin. 

Sir Thomas Gresham was not destined long to enjoy the 
repose which age brings with it, and to which a life of energy 
and action had well entitled him. Holinslied has briefly re¬ 
corded the circumstances of his decease; which appears to have 
been occasioned by a fit of apoplexy, as he returned from the 
afternoon meeting of the merchants on ’Change. “ On Satur¬ 
day, the 21st of November, 1579,” says the chronicler, “be- 
tweene six and seven of the docke in the evening, comming 























SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


199 


from tlie Exchange to his house (which he had sumptuouslie 
builded) in Bishopsgate-street, he suddenlie fell down in his 
kitchen; and being taken up, was found speechlesse, and pre¬ 
sently dead.” 

Thus, at the age ol sixty, after having served the state for 
nearly thirty years, with unsullied honour and integrity, died 
Sir Thomas Gresham, one of the most illustrious names of 
which the annals of our metropolis can boast. He found the 
credit of the crown, in foreign parts, reduced to the lowest ebb; 
but raised it by his prudent management, and left it higher 
than that of any other power: at the same time, by the skill 
with which he contrived to control the exchange with foreign 
countries, he may be considered to have laid the foundation of 
England’s commercial greatness; thereby making the balance 
of trade preponderate in its favor: so that a late writer has not 
unaptly styled him “ the great patriarch of commerce and com¬ 
mercial finance.” He elevated the character of the English 
merchant; and was one of the first to dignify the pursuits of 
trade, by showing that they are far from being incompatible 
with a taste for learning; and, in the latest actions of his life, 
he, in a manner, restored to the state the fortune he had ac¬ 
quired in its service, by numberless acts of public munificence, 
and private charity. He was a true patriot. 

His remains were interred on the 15th December, in the 
church of St. Helen’s, beneath a tomb which he had constructed 
for himself during his life time; and his body was followed to 
the grave by two hundred poor men and women, clothed in 
black gowns, according to the directions given in his will. His 
funeral was conducted in a style of splendour rarely paralleled 
in the annals of private life. The expenses attending that cere¬ 
mony, are said to have amounted to no less than 800/., being 
double the sum that was expended on the obsequies of one of 
the principal noblemen of that day. 

The costly, yet unambitious, altar-shaped tomb of Sir Thomas 
Gresham, may be seen in the eastern corner of St. Helen’s 
church. Until the year 1736, it bore no inscription. “ So great 


































200 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


a name,” says Pennant, “needed not the proclamation of an 
epitaph. It was, however, then judged advisable to inscribe 
the massive slab of black marble, which covers the tomb, with 
the following words, derived from the parish register : 

S R Thomas Gresham Knight 
bury d Decem br the 15 th 1579. 

The rest of the monument is of alabaster, richly wrought, and 
sculptured on every side with the armorial bearings of Gres¬ 
ham ; the escutcheons on the north-eastern and south-eastern 
sides impaling Fernely. Until a recent period the whole was 
protected by a delicate and tasteful rail of iron; but this had 
become so corroded and wasted by age, that it has of late been 
removed, and one more durable but less elegant, substituted. 
A large window, resplendent with the armorial bearings of Sir 
Thomas Gresham, the Mercers’ Company, and the city of which 
he was once the living ornament, admits the light of heaven to 
the spot where he reposes, surrounded by the quaint records of 
his former friends and neighbours: men memorable in their 
generations, and who, like him, have left more enduring traces 
of themselves than tombs of brass or stone. 

. .. “ When our souls shall leave this dwelling, 

The glory of one fair and virtuous action 
Is above all the ’scutcheons on our tomb, 

Or silken banners over us !” shirlet. 

The reader has, by this time, been made sufficiently well ac¬ 
quainted with Sir Thomas Gresham, through his actions and 
correspondence, to render anything beyond a general summary 
of his character, in this place, unnecessary: and more than a 
summary, it is not in our power to give; since no contemporary 
has supplied us with any of those graphic particulars which 
would have given individuality to the picture, and rendered it 
striking and interesting. He comes before us with some dis¬ 
advantages, his official correspondence alone having been pre¬ 
served ; and his office, that of a great financial officer, being of 
























SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


201 



a nature rather to repel, than to excite sympathy. Notwith¬ 
standing this, it may he fearlessly asserted, that his letters prove 
him to have been an extraordinary man. Acute in counsel, 
prompt in judgment, and energetic in action; of unwearied 
activity, both of mind and body; beloved in private life, and 
honoured in his public station; he would have been the hero of 
a story, had his spirit been more ambitious, or his conduct less 
correct. 

To- descend to particulars, Gresham seems to have had a sin¬ 
gularly conciliating disposition. His negotiations with the 
foreign merchants were always successful, even in the most 
difficult times. He successively enjoyed the confidence of every 
minister; was on terms of intimacy, or of friendship, with most 
of the leading noblemen of his time, whether Papist or Pro¬ 
testant ; and, from every sovereign under whom he served, 
received some marks of personal favour. These are evidences 
of character which there is no mistaking; and which nothing 
could impair, but a proof that, to maintain this advantage, he 
sometimes condescended to meanness or duplicity; or on any 
occasion sacrificed his principles to protect his interest. There 
does not exist the shadow of a proof that he ever acted thus; 
and since we find no evidence whatever, tending to disprove 
that, from the commencement to the close of his career (Gres¬ 
ham was a consistent Protestant; consistency, in this particular, 
being a grand touchstone of character with his contemporaries), 
we make no scruple to admit the positive evidence of a contrary 
tendency which his letters and actions supply; and believe that 
he was as sincere throughout, and as zealous as he declared 
himself to be. 

It seems to be scarcely a matter of conjecture, that, from his 
youth upwards, Sir Thomas Gresham, in his conversation and 
conduct, gave indications of abilities of a high order, or he 
would not have attracted the notice of Northumberland, while 
he was yet a young man; nor have maintained, through life, 
the confidence and friendship of Sir William Cecil. Neither 
would Queen Elizabeth, who was, in general, sparing of her 


p 
































202 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


favours, have so repeatedly bestowed upon him marks of her 
approbation ; since he certainly was not of the number of those 
who, like Leicester and Hatton, owed their success to a hand¬ 
some exterior, and to their personal accomplishments. The 
queen had, indeed, ample reason to be proud of her merchant; 
for while, among the constellation of great names which adorn 
her annals, that of Sir Thomas shines with no common brilliancy 
as a patriot and encourager of learning, he was also mainly 
instrumental in upholding the dignity of her crown, by his sa¬ 
gacious counsels and practical knowledge of business. Like a 
hidden spring, his influence on the financial mechanism of her 
policy, can neither be readily detected, nor perhaps sufficiently 
appreciated by us; but it could not fail to be well known to 
her: and who shall say how far the subsequent safety of this 
country is to be ascribed to his exertions ? or calculate the 
limits which are to be f to his influence over our national 
prosperity ? 

His two celebrated foundations are, it is needless to remark, 
lasting monuments of his liberality and public spirit; and his 
humanity and benevolence are as conspicuous in the almshouses 
he endowed, and the hospitals he enriched. We are not sur¬ 
prised to find that he distributed large sums in private charity; 
but over such mild acts oblivion has drawn a veil, which it is 
useless to endeavour to withdraw. Let it be recorded to his 
honour, that on the score of probity his name is unsullied; and 
this is no slight praise for one who had both enemies and rivals 
to contend with, and who lived in an age when men did not 
scruple to express their opinions of one another. 

It is a mark of good nature, worthy of notice, that Gresham 
was ever ready to employ his influence with the great, in favour 
of his less fortunate relations, friends, and neighbours. When 
his Yorkshire tenants, in 1561, complained of ill usage, he 
begged Sir William Cecil to write in their behalf to the lord- 
president of the north: and in the same letter he says, 
“Whereas my cousin William Gresham was in eleccion to be 
shryve [sheriff] of the shire, this is instantly to desire you, if he 



























SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


203 


be put in elexion again, that it may pleas you at my humble 
suit he may be spared for this year; because he is at no great 
fardell in his things as yet.” Again, writing to Lord Burghley 
in 1572, he says, “ This is to desire you as to have Mr. 
Stringer’s sute in remembrance. As also, this is most humblie 
to desire you as to extend your goodness unto Mr. Serjent 
Manwoode, that he maie be no judge at this time; considering 
there are sergeantes more auncient and of better welthe than 
he is: wherein your lordeship shall do me a verie singular 
pleasure, and him no less, because yet his welthe doth not serve 
to accept any such office upon him.” A few passages of a 
similar tendency have already elsewhere occurred; and if it 
were necessary, more might be adduced to prove that Gresham 
was a benevolent disposition, and willing to protect and assist 
those who required his good offices. 

In his person, Gresham seems to" >£ve been above the middle 
height; handsome, as a young man; and, at a maturer period, 
in all probability, strongly resembling the portraits published 
of him. It has been already mentioned that he was lame. 
Gravity of deportment, and courtesy of manners, are hinted 
at by two old dramatists, as having characterized him; and 
every means we possess of forming an opinion on the subject, 
leads to the belief that such was actually the case. 

In point of merit, he must be confessed to come far, very far 
behind Lorenzo de Medici: but the Florentine and the English¬ 
man are not without their points of resemblance. Each sprung 
from a family which owed its importance to the commercial 
pursuits in which its several members had been engaged, and 
each was himself a merchant; though on so extensive a scale, 
that while the one was called the “Royal Merchant,” the other 
obtained the epithet of il Mcignijico. Each devoted his wealth 
to the encouragement of learning, or to purposes of charity; 
and it was the honest ambition of each, according to his ability, 
to advance the interests of his fellow-citizens, and to adorn his 
native city. Of Gresham, it has been well remarked, that in 
founding a college, an Exchange, and an asylum for the poor, 

p 2 


































204 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


lie showed himself solicitous to provide for the wants of youth, 
the convenience of manhood, and the necessities of age. Each 
lived beloved and respected, and each was cut off in the prime 
of his days. 

But here the parallel between them ends. Italy was more 
than a century before England in literature and art, and 
Lorenzo flourished in the most palmy days of Italy. Destined 
to fill the highest offices of the State, and born in a land where 
it was the sublime privilege of wealth to be able to foster the 
genius of a Michael Angelo and a Rafaelle, while he imbibed 
from his infancy a passion for the arts, he found himself at the 
same time possessed of the means ’of gratifying so laudable a 
passion. Gresham was the younger son of a private merchant, 
who enjoyed no privileges, and whose only honours were those 
of a well-spent life. He was the maker of his own fortunes, 
and died while the brightest wits of the Elizabethan age were 
yet in their cradles. 

The Lady Anne Gresham survived her husband many years ; 
living at Osterley in the summer, and passing the winter months 
at the mansion-house in Bishopsgate-street. So little is known 
respecting this lady, that it is scarcely fair to attempt to form 
an estimate of her character: it must be sufficient, therefore, 
to mention all that may be considered characteristic, and leave 
the reader to draw his own inferences. 

It is, perhaps, not unworthy of remark, that Sir Thomas 
always mentions her with fondness, and never without an 
epithet,—“my poore wife.” He appointed his “faithfull lovinge 
wife, Dame Anne Gresham,” sole executor of his will; adding, 
“ I doe wholly put my trust in her; and have noe doubt, but 
she will accomplislie the same accordingly, and all other thinges 
as shalbe requisite or expedient for both our honesties, fames, 
and good reportes in this transitory world, and to the profitte of 
the commen weale, and relief of the careful and true poore, 
accordinge to the pleasure and will of Almighty God.” 

It was a natural, filial feeling ; and is, perhaps, scarcely en¬ 
titled to further notice, that she should have expressed her 






















SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


205 


anxiety, in 1570, to visit her mother, the aged widow of four¬ 
score and ten: yet, when materials are so scant, and our oppor¬ 
tunities even for drawing an inference so few, on such slender 
hints as these must we be content to hang the web of biography. 
Again, she was sister to the lady whom Sir Nicholas Bacon chose 
for his wife ; and this circumstance alone, did we know nothing 
else about her, would have been enough to induce a presump¬ 
tion that her mental endowments were above the common order: 
at all events, that they were respectable. The speed with which 
in her youth she was persuaded by Gresham to forsake her 
widowhood, if it does not prove that she was beautiful, does not 
at least militate against the supposition that the usual portion of 
female charms fell to her share: but here we must ’be content 
to leave these (perhaps not very important) questions; for of 
Lady Gresham, there remains neither a portrait, nor a letter. 

Finally, it must be recorded to her praise, that on the threat¬ 
ened invasion by the Spanish armada in 1588, she subscribed 
100Z. toward the defence of the country; equivalent, in those 
days, to seven or eight times that sum at present. On the 
other hand, it seems little indicative of liberality of disposition, 
that twice after her husband’s death, she attempted to derive 
unreasonable advantages from the property entrusted to her 
during her life-time. 

Lady Gresham died at Osterley-house, at a great age, on the 
23rd of November, 1596 ; having survived her husband exactly 
seventeen years. Her remains were conveyed to London, and 
interred in St. Helen’s church, in the same vault with Sir 
Thomas, on the 14th of December following. We have an in¬ 
distinct glimpse of the heraldic pomp which attended this cere¬ 
monial, in the following entry respecting “The lunerall of 
Dame [Anne] Gresham, wife to Sir Thomas Gresham, knight; 
who was buryed the 15th [sZc] of December, 1596, at the 
parish church of St.- Ellen’s, London. The officers serving 
ther, wer Clarencieulx and Rougecroix, pursuivants at armes; 
who received for ther fees, fourtye pounds.” Such is Rouge- 
croix’s memorandum; and it may not be improper to add, that 










206 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


the heralds received the same fee, when they attended the 
funeral of Queen Elizabeth. 

Sir Thomas Gresham’s widow survived, and was survived by, 
many members of her own family, by her former husband. Her 
son, Sir William Read, attained to a great age; being certainly 
upwards of eighty-three years old before his death: but her 
grandson, Sir Thomas Read, who married Mildred, second 
daughter of our old friend, Thomas Cecil, Earl of Exeter, died 
at Osterley, without issue, on the 3rd of July, 1595, and was 
buried on the 14th of the same month, in Sir Thomas Gresham’s 
vault. “ The Lady Gertruda Reade, wife of Sir William Reade, 
knt., died on Thursday, being the xxiiij th day of October, 1605 ; 
and was buryed in Sir Thomas Gresham’s vault, vppon the 
leaden coffyn, vppon Tuesday, being the iij rd day of December, 
1605.” 

Sir Thomas Gresham’s will is, on the whole, a less interest¬ 
ing document than might have been expected. Besides pro¬ 
viding for the management of his estates, it contains little more 
than an enumeration of legacies. It deserves to be mentioned, 
however, that towards the relief of poor persons, and prisoners 
in Newgate, Ludgate, the King’s Bench, the Marslialsea, and 
Wood-street Compter, he left the sum of 50/. annually; that is, 
10/. to each of the said prisons: a gift to which seven or eight 
times the same amount, at the present day, would be barely 
equivalent. Gresham made a precisely similar disposition of 
property, in favour of Christ-church Hospital (known before as 
the Grey Friars); St. Bartholomew’s Hospital; ‘the spittle of 
Bedlem, nere Bishopsgate-streete; the Hospitall of the poore, 
in Southwark’ (St. Thomas’s); and the Poultry Compter. The 
care of the former bequest being confided to the city of London ; 
the latter, to the Mercers’ Company. In accordance with the 
manners of his time, the testator further charged his property 
with the annual expenditure of 100/.; to be bestowed on four 
quarterly dinners to his Company. All such expenses, to the 
honour of the Mercers be it recorded, are defrayed out of their 
general funds. It will probably suggest itself to every reader, 








SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


207 


that in somewhat the same ratio as it would have been found 
necessary to increase the sum of 25?., to defray the expenses of 
a dinner, should the annuities to the hospitals and prisons be 
increased, in order that the charitable intentions of the testator 
might be fulfilled. 

Behind his mansion in Bisliopsgate-street, Gresham erected 

• 

eight almshouses; and by his will he left to each of the ‘ poor 
and impotent persons’ within them, an annuity of 61. 13s. 4c?. 
The city, by whom these eight pensioners on Sir Thomas 
Gresham’s bounty are appointed, have liberally increased their 
yearly allowance to 26?.—supplying them, in addition, with 
coals and clothes: but the almshouses which they erected in 
1768, in the city Green-yard, Whitecross-street, form so in¬ 
different a substitute for the eight little tenements contrived by 
Sir Thomas Gresham, that it may be reasonably questioned 
whether their founder would admire the change, could he rise 
from his grave to witness it. 

Still less, it may well be supposed, would Gresham have 
approved of the arrangements with regard to his college, which 
at first impaired its utility, and eventually led to its annihilation. 
The facts of the case are lamentable, and cannot be too often 
brought forward and insisted upon. Sir Thomas Gresham left 
to the city his own mansion ; in the vastness of its proportions, 
and the extent of its accommodations, perfectly well adapted for 
the purposes of a college. He most liberally endowed seven 
lectureships, for the gratuitous instruction of all who chose to 
be instructed in divinity, astronomy, music, geometry, law, 
medicine, and rhetoric; and, to secure to his fellow-citizens the 
advantages which he proposed conferring upon them, he ap¬ 
pointed the City of London and the Mercers’ Company his joint 
trustees. In process of time, the ground on which Gresliam- 
College stood, became so valuable, we are told,—the trust so 
unprofitable (in consequence of the expenses incurred in re¬ 
building the Exchange, after the great fire),—and the building 
itself so ruinous, that it was found expedient to dispose of the 
property ; and, in the year 1 1 68 , an act of parliament was ob- 










208 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


tained, authorising the sale of the estate: it was, accordingly, 
disposed of to government, for an annual payment of 500/. ; and 
the Excise Office arose on its site. A more unjustifiable pro¬ 
ceeding, when all the circumstances of the case are considered, 
does not exist on record. From that time, an obscure room, 
over the Royal Exchange, was appointed for the delivery of the 
lectures; and a pecuniary compensation was made to the seven 
professors, for the loss of their pleasant collegiate residences. So 
immensely has ground, in the city of London, increased in value 
of late years, that had Gresham-College been suffered to remain, 
or had any reasonable use of that property been made during 
the interval, the trustees to whom the management of its funds 
was confided, would have been enabled, long before the present 
period, to erect a college on the ancient site, whose revenues 
would have been as immense as its benefits would have been 
incalculable. 

The legacies in Gresham’s will, were as follows:—40/. to 
each of his four apprentices—William Gilbert, Philip Celye, 
John Smyth, and Philip Gilmor. To his servant John Young, 
20 /., and 10 /. per annum, ‘ as long as he doth tarry with my 
wife half that sum Gresham bequeathed on the same terms 
to Guilliam, his horse-keeper, and Gilles, his servant: to his 
steward, John Lawrence, 20 /., and to each of his other servants, 
51. To Thomas Manson, 20/. and an annuity of 10/.: to 
Margaret Fernely on the day of her marriage, 100 /. ; and 50/. 

on the same occasion, to his cousin.Elliott. To his cousin 

Nowell, 40/. ; and 10 /. a year, ‘ as long as he tarryeth and 
dwelleth with my wife.’ To 100 poor men, and the same num¬ 
ber of poor women, as many gowns of black cloth, costing 65 . 
8 d. per yard,—‘for to bring me to my grave.’ To Cicely 
Ciole, 100 /. To his five executors—Sir Lionel Duckett, 100 /; 
Edmund Hogan, 100 /.; Thomas Celie, 100 /.; Philip Scudamore, 
20 /. ; and Mr. Justice Manwood, 50/. To his niece Elizabeth 
Neville, Gresham left 500/. ; 100 /. on the day of her marriage, 

and an annuity of 100 /. for five years : and to his niece. 

Neville, 300/. ; 100 /. on the day of her marriage, (provided she 

























SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


209 


did not marry before she was fifteen years of age,) and an 
annuity of 100/. for three years. To Harry Neville, when he 
should attain the age of twenty, 100/. ; and To every of his 
sons had by my brother’s daughter, 100/.’ Proved 26tli Nov. 
1579. Bakon, quire xlvij.—Gresham further charged his estates 
with the following annuities:—“To William Fletwoode, 40s. ; 
Thomas Powell, 40s.; Edward Flowerdew, 405.; James Ryvet, 
405.; William Yelverton, 265. Sri.; Christopher Rye, 405 .; 
Phillip Scudamore, 26/. 135. Ad. ; Christopher Rochel, 5/.; Mr. 
Owen, 405. for their counselles. More to Mr. Doctor Lankton, 
405. [a man of indifferent character by the way, Stowe’s 
Survey, ed. 1720, b. i. p. 258. who had been an author in 
1547, comp. Stowe, b. ii. p. 167, and Lowndes p. 1095.]; Dr. 
Jefford, 405.; Rauf Morrys, 405., William Gotherns, 51. for 
their counsell and help in phesick and surgery. To William 
Pernel, 10/., to Hugh Powell, 205., to the lady Taylboyes,” 
concerning whom we find no notice elsewhere, worth record¬ 
ing, the very large annuity of “266/. 135. Ad. ; to the Lady 
Frances Gresham, 133/. 6s. 8 d. In all amounting per annum 
to 467/.” 

The pedigree to the Gresham family was published by Dr. 
Ward in 1740. The introduction prefixed to the genealogy is 
as follows :— 

“ A true and exact pedigree of the right worshipfull, 
ancient, pious, loyal, and charitable family of Gresham, in the 
county of Norfolk, sometimes residing at Holte, Intwood, Myle- 
ham, Walsingham Parva, and Thorpe Market in the said 
county; at Founteyness in the county of York; at York; in 
Titsey, and Limesfield in Surry ; at Osterley, and Fulham in 
the county of Middlesex : wherein are inserted the several 
marriages and alliances to severall other worshipfull, and some 
honourable familys. Which family was at once seiz’d in Nor¬ 
folk of thirty-five mannors, in Suffolk of five, in Cambridge¬ 
shire of one, in Kent of three, in Sussex of two, in Surry of 
nine, in Middlesex of two, in Somerset of two, in Derbyshire 
of three, in Yorkshire of nine, and of twelve granges, and 

Q 















210 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


severall other villatae , and considerable possessions in the same 
county, and of three mannors in the bishoprick of Durham; 
as appears by severall letters patent, fines, deeds enrolled, in¬ 
quisitions post mortem , wills, and private evidences, now in 
the hands of some of that family. And out of which family, 
within the compass of an hundred and fifty years last past, there 
has been one baronet, nine knights batchelers, whereof one 
knighted in the field ; one baronet’s wife, and nine knights 
wives of the name and family of Gresham : and have issued from 
them in that time two viscounts, seven baronets, twenty-four 
knights, two countesses, five baronets’ wives, and twenty-two 
knights’ wives.” 

Amongst the illustrious individuals who have lineally descended 
from the family of Gresham, may be enumerated, the Duke of 
Buckingham, the Marquis of Stafford, the Marquis of Bath, 
Lord Braybrook, and the Gower family. Sir Thomas Gresham 
was also related to some of the most eminent men of his time, 
including the Earls of Oxford, Exeter, and Salisbury; Lord 
Burgliley, Lord Bacon, and several Knights. 

One of the daughters of Sir John Gresham, was married to 
Thomas Leveson, or Lewson, Esq., of Hailing Place, near Ro¬ 
chester. Her birth is thus recorded:—“Vrsule Gresham was 
borne a pon Saynt Vrsuly’s daye, the xxi day off October, a 0 
1534. Mr. Wyllm. Gresham, her godfather; and Mr. Ric. 
Gresham’s wyfe, and olde Mystris Hille, and Christian Gres¬ 
ham, were godmothers; and God make her a good old woman, 
and blyssyed saynt Vrsula—the Wedynsday.” From her, the 
Duke of Buckingham and the Marquis of Stafford are descended. 
William Leveson Gower, Esq., of Titsey Park, in Surrey, 
belongs to the family of the latter nobleman, and can therefore 
trace a maternal descent from Sir John Gresham, through his 
son; and a paternal descent through his daughter. 

The birth of Mary Gresham, eldest daughter of Sir John, is 
thus noticed:—“ Mary Gresham [the eldest daughter, who 
became the wife of Sir Thomas Rowe,] was borne the xvij daye 
of August, callyd octava Sancti Lawrencij, A 0 dni xv c xxiii: 






SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


211 


and my Lady Allen, and Mystris Kyng, and Mystrys Lock,— 
thes were her godmothers; and Mr. John Worsop was her 
godffather. Uppon the Mondaye: and God make her a good 
old woman.” 

Far more interesting than most of the relationships, indicated 
in the pedigree, is the following; which shall be given in the 
words of the intelligent antiquary and very expert genealogist 
by whom it was kindly communicated—the Rev. Joseph Hun¬ 
ter. “John Gresham, of Mayfield, cousin-german of Sir 
Thomas, married Elizabeth Dormer, of Fulham. This is in the 
Baronetage; but it is not stated that she survived him, and 
married, 2ndly, William Plumbe, of North End, near Fulham, 
whose will was proved 1st March, 1593 ; in which, he speaks 
of Thomas and John Gresham, sons of his wife. What gives 
something of interest to this connexion is, that William Plumbe 
was uncle to Joshua Sylvester , the poet: as appears by his 
‘Triumph of Faith.’ Now, may not the Greshams have had 
something to do with placing Sylvester in the situation of mer¬ 
chant-adventurer ? The poet was a frequent guest at the house 
of his uncle and his aunt (by the marriage), who had been Mrs. 
Gresham: 


‘ I was wont (for my disport) 

Often in the summer season. 

To a village to resort, 

Famous for the rathe-ripe peason. 

When, beneath a Plumb -tree shade, 

Many pleasant walks I ma lo,’ &c.” 

Another interesting relationship, pointed out by the same 
antiquary, is that of the Greshams to the ancient family of 
Clapham, of Yorkshire. According to Dodsworth, (MS. cxxxv. 
f. 79, b.) Catharine, sister of the lady of John Gresham, one of 
the daughters and co-heiresses of Sir Henry Thwaites, married 
George Clapham, of Beamsley; by whom she had a son, named 
Gresham Clapham, father of George Clapham, of Beamsley, 
who married a Heber, of Marton. The wife of Gresham Clap- 

Q2 








212 


SIR THOMAS GRESHAM. 


ham, was Ann Fisher, daughter and heir of William Fisher, 
the son of a sister (half-blood) of Bishop Ferrar, the martyr. 

The crest of the Gresham family was the grasshopper; as 
appears by several letters, written between the years 1443 and 
1464, by James Gresham; the whole of which are sealed with 
that well-known device ;—a sufficient refutation of the idle tra¬ 
dition accounting for the adoption of that heraldic symbol by 
Sir Thomas Gresham, and which he had erected over his shoj) 
door, in Lombard Street, as a sign. The arms of Sir John 
Gresham were—the coat of the Greshams, a chief, or; a trefoil, 
azure, between two asses’ heads, erased, sable, collared. To 
which, in the year 1537, Sir Richard Gresham had granted to 
him and his posterity, the following augmentation: on a chief, 
gules, a pelican between two lions’ gambs erased, or, armed, 
azure. 

It now only remains for us to notice, that the Burse, dedicated 
by Sir Thomas Gresham to his country, and styled the Royal 
Exchange by Queen Elizabeth, was destroyed by fire, on the 
night of the 10th of January, 1838. The merchants of London, 
however, did not suffer it to remain in ruins. The edifice, on a 
modern and more commodious scale, was rebuilt, after a design 
by Henry Tite, Esq., R.S.A., architect; and re-opened with 
great state, and again surnamed the Royal Exchange, by Queen 
Victoria, on the 28th of October, 1844. We have, as an addi¬ 
tion to our labours, presented to our readers three different 
engraved views of the present edifice. 

[Note. —The family of Gresham is so connected with the prosperity of 
the city of London, that the present work would have been incomplete 
without a notice of the life of Sir Thomas Gresham. It is erro¬ 
neously stated, however, at the head of this chapter, that Sir 
Thomas was Lord Mayor; this is an unintentional error. Sir Thomas 
Gresham never held any civic dignity.] 





















WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 

(lord MAYOR.) 

The name of Beckford occupies a prominent position in the 
records of the city of London, arising principally from the part 
he took in the political struggles of the time in which he lived, 
when the celebrated John Wilkes did so much towards the 
annoyance of the ministry of the day. He twice served the 
office of Lord Mayor: namely, in 1762-3, and 1769-70. 

Mr. Beckford was a native of Jamaica; from whence he 
appears to have come to England, at the age of fourteen years. 
He was immediately sent by his friends to Westminster school, 
where he studied, with great applause, under the tuition of the 
Rev. Dr. Friend—then chief master—a gentleman of extensive 
knowledge in the classics, as evidenced by the many inscriptions 
upon tombs in Westminster Abbey. Whilst at this school, 
young Beckford became acquainted with many of the principal 
nobility, and men of genius; amongst whom may be mentioned 
the name of Lord Mansfield; as well as those of Dr. Johnson, 
the Bishop of Gloucester, and the Earl of Kinnoul. During 
his studies, Mr. Beckford translated some of the classics, which 
he afterwards wrote out in a fair hand; but the manuscripts 
were all destroyed by a fire, which broke out in the family 
mansion, at Fonthill, some time subsequently. 

It is most probable that the time of his birth would be about 
the year 1700, or perhaps 1699 ; that of his arrival in England, 
1713 or 1714. Of his pursuits, after leaving Westminster, we 
have no authentic record, except that he was an extensive West 
India planter and merchant. That his career was an active 



























214 


WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


one, however, and his fortune large, there cannot be a doubt; 
for we find that, in 1747, he was chosen member of Parliament, 
both for the city of London and the borough of Petersfield ; but, 
deciding to sit for the former, he gave to the latter £400 for 
paving their streets, as an acknowledgement of the honour 
which they had conferred upon him. In 1753, he was again 
elected for the city of London; a proof that his parliamentary 
services were approved of: and, at the same time, his brother 
Richard, a barrister in Jamaica, was, by his influence, returned 
for the city of Bristol. Richard does not seem to have enjoyed 
his honours long; for he died in Jamaica, in 1756, leaving his 
fortune, which was estimated at £10,000 per annum, to the 
subject of the present notice. 

The conduct of Mr. Beckford, in the House of Commons, 
was of the most spirited description; and his speeches were 
invariably terse and well put. He was not ashamed to acknow¬ 
ledge that he was no courtier, and that he disdained being one 
of the supernumeraries attending the throne. During the warm 
and protracted debates which occurred in the House on the 
bringing over to this country of the Hanoverian and Hessian 
troops, in 1755, he seconded Mr. Pitt in every speech made by 
him against that measure, and declared himself decidedly opposed 
to all continental connexions; and, in 1759, when the state of 
the German war was debated, he told the government that the 
support thereof was more burthensome than even the yoke of 
an enemy. “We,” said he, “pay for everything at a most ex¬ 
orbitant rate; here is, in the last accounts, an article of a draw¬ 
bridge, valued at £80,000; and I have a letter in my pocket, 
from a connoisseur in these matters, who declares that, between 
man and man, it is not at the utmost worth above £7,000; 
however, the overplus will be a pretty perquisite in the pocket 
of a hungry foreigner; but, God help us, we must pay for all ! ” 

Nor are there wanting occasions when Mr. Beckford spoke 
as boldly before his constituents, and even before his sovereign: 
the general election, in 1761, gave an opportunity for one, and 
the presentation of a city memorial, to George III., for the other : 





















WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


215 


of the latter, however, we shall have occasion to speak more at 
large hereafter. 

Mr. Beckford, in addition to the attention which he had to 
devote to his extensive business affairs, and his distantly situ¬ 
ated property, was a member of the House of Commons, an 
officer of militia, a provincial magistrate, and an alderman of 
London. It is not surprising, therefore, that accusations were 
made against him, at the election in 1761, that he had not duly 
attended, for some time past, his duty as an alderman: and, at 
a meeting of the livery, for the nomination of representatives, 
Mr. Beckford attended, in order that he might justify himself. 
We are told, in the newspapers of that day, that the hall was 
crowded in every part of it; and when he came forward to 
address the livery, he was received with the most tumultuous 
marks of contempt and aversion, by all; for the space of more 
than an hour, he was prevented from being heard. His resolu¬ 
tion, however, prevailed; and, silence having been obtained, he 
addressed the meeting as follows :— 

“ Gentlemen of the livery, and fellow citizens,—I thought it 
my duty to attend here this day, both in justice to you, and to 
your faithful, humble servant. I had been informed, and my 
present experience convinces me I was truly informed, that a 
very unfavourable opinion had gone forth against me, amongst 
my late worthy constituents. Permit me to say, gentlemen, 
with the boldness becoming an honest man, that I have not 
deserved it. It has been my chief pride to be a representative 
of the first city in the world; and I shall relinquish such an 
honour with much concern and mortification; but I will not 
flatter you, in order to obtain a continuance of it. It is my 
duty to speak out, and act, as I ever have done, with openness 
and integrity. My abilities may not be equal to those of many 
other gentlemen whom you may choose to represent you; but I 
defy you to find any one who will serve you with more zeal and 
attention than I have done,—a zeal and attention which, give 
me leave to say, does not deserve the degrading reception I 
have met with from you this day. But I am informed that I 















216 


WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


am more particularly accused of not regularly attending my 
duty in the Court of Aldermen, and elsewhere, as one of your 
magistrates. In some degree, I plead guilty to the charge ; but 
I must beg of you to remember that, during the winter, I am 
engaged in doing my duty as your representative in parliament; 
and, when I am obliged to attend the House of Commons, I 
cannot attend the Court of Aldermen; for no man can be in 
two places at one time. During the summer, gentlemen, I have 
of late been engaged in doing my duty as an officer of the 
militia; and thereby promoting, to the utmost of my power, 
that excellent, necessary, and constitutional establishment; and 
when I am engaged in attendance upon the militia, I cannot 
attend the Court of Aldermen. It has been told me, also, that 
I have given offence to many of you, by not canvassing your 
votes; I am sorry for it, because I respect you too much, and 
love the constitution of my country too well, to infringe on the 
freedom of election; of which, in these corrupt times, this city 
still continues to give a most glorious example. If you recollect, 
gentlemen, I did not canvass you at the last general election. I 
have not canvassed you for the approaching one; and, I will 
tell you honestly, I never will canvass you ; you shall elect me 
without a canvass, or not at all. This is the defence of myself 
which I offer to you; and, if it should not satisfy you, I must 
be content to thank you for past favours, and to assure you I 
shall still have a seat in the House of Commons, and I will con¬ 
tinue to exert my best endeavours for your service, as I always 
have done.” 

The burst of applause that succeeded to this spirited harangue, 
was, if possible, superior to the noisy dissatisfaction which pre¬ 
ceded it; and Mr. Beckford accompanied by numerous friends, 
left the hall, amidst a tumult of approbation; his election being 
afterwards triumphtly carried. 

In 1758, Mr. Beckford was elected to the office of sheriff; 
and, during his shrievalty, he gave such entertainments to the 
judges, sergeants, and counsel learned in the law, at the end of 
every term, as astonished all who partook of them. 






WILLIAM BECK FORD, ESQ. 


217 


Mr. Beckford was elected alderman in the year 1750, for the 
ward of Billingsgate, and in August and September, 1762, 
he had signified to the Lord Mayor his desire to resign his 
gown—a desire which was not attended to. 

On St. Michael’s day, 1762, Alderman Beckford, against his 
own wishes, was declared the Lord Mayor elect for the ensuing 
year; upon which occasion he addressed himself in a speech to 
the livery, purporting, that if it had been their pleasure to have 
heard him before their decision had been given, he should have 
desired they would excuse his taking upon him the office of Lord 
Mayor, as the ill state of health he had been in for some years 
past, and the multiplicity of business which he had on his hands, 
rendered him incapable of discharging the office, which he 
looked upon to be of great dignity and importance, in the 
manner that it ought to be; that he had also the highest vene¬ 
ration for the name of citizen; that his family were citizens; 
that some of them had borne the highest offices, for a century 
past; and that, as the livery had elected him, he was determined 
to serve the office to the best of his ability, let the consequence 
to himself be what it might. In furtherance of his intention, 
Mr. Beckford spared no cost in preparation: his state coach 
was splendid in the extreme ; and we are told, that he purchased 
for it, in Holland, a set of beautiful horses; the record of the 
transaction adding, “In that country, the tails of horses are not 
cut, as in England.” His inaugural dinner was attended by the 
great officers of state, divers of the nobility, lords of his Ma¬ 
jesty’s most honourable privy council, the judges, and other 
persons of quality and distinction; and, during the year, he 
gave four entertainments, which were said to be the most mag¬ 
nificent of any which had been seen since the reign of Henry 
VIII. 

In 1769, Mr. Beckford was again put in nomination for the 
mayoralty; but on this occasion, Mr. Alderman 1 recothick, and 
Sir Henry Bankes, Knight, were put up in opposition to him; 
the two former had the show of hands, and a poll was demanded 
for Sir II. Bankes; at the close of which, the numbers were 

R 












218 


WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


for Mr. Beckford, 1967; for Mr. Trecothick, 1911; and for 
Sir H. Bankes, 676; and, such was the determination of the 
Court of Aldermen, when the two names were submitted to 
them, that, notwithstanding Mr. Beckford’s earnest request, 
they elected him to the office, by a majority of sixteen to six. 
He declared his intention of declining the office, assuring the 
livery that nothing but the sense he had of his own inabilities, 
prevented his accepting the honour they intended him; adding, 
that the spirit was strong, but the flesh was weak. His refusal 
for some time to take upon himself the office, led to warm steps 
being taken by the livery, about fifty of whom, in fourteen 
coaches, accompanied by the Sheriffs in their state chariots, 
went in procession to the Alderman’s house, in Soho-square, 
where they met with a polite and cordial reception. The chair¬ 
man, in the name of the livery, in the strongest terms of respect, 
solicited, with much importunity, that Mr. Beckford would, at 
this important crisis, serve the office of Lord Mayor for the 
year ensuing, to which dignity he had been a second time 
elected. Mr. Beckford at last yielded to their earnest request; 
and told them that, notwithstanding his advanced years, with 
all his infirmities, he would devote himself to the service of this 
metropolis, as well as of the nation in general, by accepting the 
office; and that he would go to Fonthill, for eight days, to settle 
his private affairs, that he might give up his whole time to the 
execution of the important trust reposed in him. Mr. Beckford 
then withdrew; and, on his return, he delivered the following 
letter to the Sheriffs, which he requested they would present, in 
his name, to the Lord Mayor:— 


“ Soho Square, Oct. 12, 1769. 

“My Lord Mayor,—I cannot resist the importunate request 
of my fellow citizens ; their desires have overcome resolutions that 
I once thought were fixed and determined. The feeble efforts 
of a worn-out man to serve them, can never answer their san¬ 
guine expectations. I will do my best, and will sacrifice ease 
and retirement—the chief comforts of old age—to their wishes. 




























WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


219 


I will accept of the office of Lord Mayor. I shall hope for the 
assistance of your Lordship, and my brethren of the Court of 
Aldermen; the advantage and good effects of their advice were 
experienced on many occasions during my late mayoralty, by 
your Lordship’s most obedient and faithful humble servant, 

“William Beckford.” 

This decision gave very great satisfaction; and Mr. Beckford 
fulfilled his intention of retiring to Fonthill for a season: in the 
interim, however, he gave the necessary directions for his official 
equipages, which this year surpassed all others in their magni¬ 
ficence. The state coach is thus described: “ The box is 
adorned with crimson velvet, curiously embroidered with gold; 
at each corner, is a cornucopia of flowers; in the centre, besides 
other decorations curiously wrought, are his arms, with the 
motto, “ Libertas pretiosior auro; ” under which, are the city 
arms; and, above, the cap of liberty. The harness is very 
grand, and the horses very beautiful, being iron greys, with 
black manes, tails, and muzzles; they are fourteen hands three 
inches high.” A new service of plate, of the value of eight 
hundred guineas, was ordered to be in readiness for the civic 
banquet on Lord Mayor’s day. Nor did he forget the poor; for 
on the day on which he was sworn into office, he ordered to be 
distributed in the parish of St. Ann, Soho, to every poor man a 
leg of mutton, a half-peck loaf, three pounds of potatoes, and 
half-a-crown in money; to every poor woman six pounds of 
beef, one quartern and one threepenny loaf, and one shilling and 
sixpence in money; and to every indigent family, one guinea. 
The procession on Lord Mayor’s day was most imposing; the 
crowd being prodigiously great, and the acclamations of the 
people exceeded anything ever heard before. Among the crowd 
were a number of men, with blue cockades in their hats, on 
which were Beckford and No. 45, with the words liberty, porter, 
and money, as their construction of his Lordships’ Latin motto 
above given. A chronicler of the day, after describing the gor¬ 
geous nature of the feast and its accompaniments, with a list ol 
























220 


WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


the distinguished individuals who partook thereof, says, “ There 
were present Lord Temple with a garter more than other men? 
and Mr. Sergeant Glynn without any garters at all; Colonel 
Barre with a single eye, and Lord Shelburne with a single 
heart: ” a description which would doubtless be then well un¬ 
derstood. 

The Recorder of London, however, does not seem to have so 
warmly approved of Mr. Beckford, as did the other members of 
the Corporation ; from what cause, is not shown ; but, in intro¬ 
ducing the Lord Mayor elect to the Lord Chancellor, for the 
purpose of being sworn in, he is reported to have said, “ My 
Lord, I beg leave to present for your Lordship’s approbation, 
Mr. Alderman Beckford, who has been elected Lord Mayor by 
the Livery of the city of London, and approved by the Court of 
Aldermen, notwithstanding he is rendered incapable of exer¬ 
cising the office, by an express bye-law of the city.” To this 
anything but complimentary speech, the Lord Chancellor re¬ 
plied, “Notwithstanding the singularity of this introduction, I 
have the pleasure of being able to give an entire approbation of 
the present choice of the city of London. The repeated election 
of Mr. Beckford to the high office of Lord Mayor, is a most 
honourable circumstance for him; and the long knowledge I 
myself have had of him, makes me think the choice of such a 
chief magistrate, reflects honour on his electors. Mr. Beckford’s 
conduct with regard to the public, and the independence which 
he has always maintained, have established his character for in¬ 
tegrity, to which, I am glad to find, the citizens of London have 
fixed their seal.” The civic honours of the year were supported 
in Mr. Beckford’s usual magnificent style. 

The political struggles of the period brought the Corporation 
of London into active operation in support of their own views. 
In the early part of the year 1770, a petition from the Livery, 
for the redress of the nation’s grievances, was presented to the 
King, who did not deign a reply thereto. A common hall was 
consequently held, the Aldermen having joined the Livery, and 
a strong remonstrance to his Majesty was the result. The Lord 























WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


221 


Mayor addressed the Common Hall at great length. He said it 
was particularly necessary for the Livery of London to behave, 
in the present crisis, with dignity, order, and decency; because 
they had been misrepresented, traduced, and abused in the pub¬ 
lic papers, as a factious, seditious rabble, a turbulent mob, the 
scum of the earth. He observed, that himself had been grossly 
abused through the same channels; but that he gloried in such 
abuse. His speech was loudly applauded; and a strongly- 
worded address and remonstrance to the throne was agreed to; 
and, after much opposition, was presented to the King by the 
Lord Mayor, attended by the usual officers: the Lord Mayor 
also presented to the King, in May, in the same year, a petition, 
address, and remonstrance, adopted at a Court of Common 
Council, relative to the treatment of Mr. Wilks, by the House 
of Commons, in the matter of the Middlesex election. The 
address also alluded to the reply of the King to the former re¬ 
monstrance, which, it was considered, was an affront to the city 
—an “awful sentence of censure.” This second remonstrance 
was presented on the 23rd of May; and on its receipt, the King, 
in reference to his former reply, said he should have been want¬ 
ing in duty to the public, as well as to himself, if he had not 
expressed his dissatisfaction at the late address; his sentiments 
upon which remained the same. The Lord Mayor then ad¬ 
dressed his Majesty as follows:— 

Most Gracious Sovereign,—Will your Majesty be pleased so 
far to condescend as to permit the Mayor of your loyal city of 
London to declare in your royal presence, on behalf of his 
fellow citizens, how much the bare apprehension of your Ma¬ 
jesty’s displeasure'would at all times affect their minds; the 
declaration of that displeasure has already filled them with 
inexpressible anxiety, and with the deepest affliction. Permit 
me, Sire, to assure your Majesty, that your Majesty has not in 
all your dominions any subjects more faithful, more dutiful, 
or more affectionate to your Majesty’s person and family, or 
more ready to sacrifice their lives and fortunes in the main¬ 
tenance of the true honour and dignity of your crown. We 





















222 


WILLIAM BECKFOIiD, ESQ. 


do, therefore, with the greatest humility and submission, most 
earnestly supplicate your Majesty that you will not dismiss 
us from your presence without expressing a more favourable 
opinion of your faithful citizens, and without some comfort, 
without some prospect, at least, of redress. Permit me, Sire, 
further to observe, that whoever has already dared, or shall 
endeavour, by false insinuations and suggestions, to alienate 
your Majesty’s affections from your loyal subjects in general, 
and from those of the city of London in particular, and to 
withdraw your confidence in and regard for your people, is 
an enemy to your Majesty’s person and family, a violater of 
the public peace, and a betrayer of our happy constitution as it 
was established at the glorious revolution.” 

No reply was given to his Lordship, but the wdiole Court 
acknowledged that he spoke with great propriety. His whole 
conduct gave general satisfaction. On attending at Court, how¬ 
ever, in order to present a subsequent address to their Ma¬ 
jesties, congratulatory on the birth of a princess, Mr. Beckford 
was not admitted into the presence chamber until the Lord in 
waiting had ascertained that it was not his intention to speak. 

It has been said by some, that Mr. Beckford was deficient 
in the external graces of manners and expression ; adorned 
with these accomplishments, he would have made a first-rate 
figure. He possessed a sound understanding, and very ex¬ 
tensive knowledge of British politics, especially that important 
part of it which relates to trade and commerce ; nor did he 
ever disgrace himself by a variableness or inconsistency of 
conduct. His manners generally were not pleasant; but this 
did not arise so much from disposition, as from an ardent, 
impetuous turn of mind, whose fervour be always indulged. 
This impetuous animation, accompanied with an inharmonious 
voice and vehemence of action, prevented his public speaking, 
as well as his private conversation, from receiving that atten¬ 
tion and affording that pleasure which from his knowledge and 
abilities the one might be supposed to have deserved, and the 
other to have produced. In the House of Commons, he often- 














WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


223 


times called forth the laughter, and frequently promoted the 
langour of his audience, from no other cause than the neglect of 
digesting and arranging the matter he delivered. With what¬ 
ever irregularity, however, he might discourse as a senator, he 
never spoke in that character without conveying very solid 
information upon the subject before him. Pie most certainly 
did not possess that strong, rapid, convincing oratory which 
draws the heart after it, and hushes opposition into silence; 
nevertheless, instances are not wanting of his success in even 
that particular, as may be gathered from the effect produced by 
his speech before the Livery, which we have already quoted. 
As a magistrate, he was strict, but not severe; and laid it down 
as a maxim never to suffer any person, when brought before 
him, to sign his confession; declaring that the practice was 
barbarous and tyrannical. His immense fortune fixed him in a 
state of independence; and he was, therefore, generally in oppo¬ 
sition to the ministry. In Parliament, his zeal carried him so 
far as sometimes to speak upon things with which he was not 
thoroughly acquainted; however, his views were looked upon 
to be upright, and his intentions sincere. 

Mr. Beckford did not live wholly in England ; he was absent, 
both in Holland and the Indies, on different occasions; his ex¬ 
tensive affairs naturally requiring his presence. Of his domestic 
arrangements little is known, except that in 1756 he married 
the widow of Francis March, Esq. That he had at least one 
son, is certain; for we find him, in 1769 or 1770, appointed to 
a cornetcy in a regiment of life guards. 

On the 30th of May, 1770, the first stone of the present gaol 
of the Old Bailey was laid by Mr. Beckford, when the usual 
ceremonies attendant upon such occasions, were duly observed, 
and a treat was given to the workmen, principally at the 
expense of Mr. Beckford. 

Of his private life, this is no time to speak. There are those 
who have cast a slur on some of his actions, with what truth it 
is foreign to our purpose to enquire. Youthful follies he might 
be guilty of; but it is not to be inferred from this, that he 



























224 


WILLIAM BECKFORD, ESQ. 


neglected any of tlie duties which as a husband and father 
devolved upon him. 

In his public duties he was ever prompt, judicious and 
faithful, pursuing the course which he marked out for himself 
with strict integrity of purpose, and never suffering his judg¬ 
ment to be warped by private interest. He was not one of 
those who 

“Assume a virtue though they have it not;” 
nor would any consideration induce him to neglect what he 
deemed to be his duty. 

In the latter period of his life, when the infirmities of nearly 
four-score years were dimming his eye and paralyzing his 
strength, it is not to be wondered at that he should desire ease, 
and shun rather than court publicity. Hence his frequent and 
lengthy visits to Fonthill, and his partial giving up of sena¬ 
torial and magisterial duties. 

The record of his death is slight in the extreme. He expired 
from natural decay, during the second year of his mayoralty, in 
1770, being then most probably in his seventy-second year. 

Mr. Beckford’s unbounded wealth gave him opportunities for 
private charity which he did not suffer to pass unimproved ; 
and his civic entertainments, as noticed elsewhere, were served 
with a profusion and richness which eclipsed those of most of 
his predecessors. 

















WILLIAM GYLL, ESQ. 


(lord mayor). 

The family name of Gyll has been variously written, like 
many other patronymics, according to the fashion of the age; 
and although the substitution of the i, in Gill, for the y, which 
used to characterise the spelling, was adopted about the period 
of King Charles I., the present representatives of this house 
have obtained the royal permission to resume the ancient ortho¬ 
graphy of their appellation. 

Mr. Gyll was the youngest son of William Gyll, Esq., of 
Boxley, Kent (by Elizabeth, daughter and heir of John Law¬ 
rence, Esq. who descended from Sir John Lawrence, Knight, 
Lord Mayor of London, in 1663), where he resided, and once 
owped the paper mills, styled Turkey Mills, which he sold 
to Mr. James Whatman, in 1730, who, in 1739, pulled them 
down and erected larger and much more useful factories, 
whereby he realized an adequate fortune, which his descend¬ 
ants still enjoy at Vinters, in that locality. They are situated 
in a little river which runs on the north side of the road lead¬ 
ing from Maidstone to the moat, and were formerly used as 
fulling mills; but, on the decay of the clothing trade in these 
districts, they were converted into paper mills, by Mr. George 
Gyll (father of William), who repaired hither from Dart- 
ford, in 1680. George was son of Thomas Gyll, of Dartford, 
who died there, 1667 ; whose father, John Gyll, had been a * 
partisan in the civil wars which raged in that county and town 
in which he was interred in 1646; having removed from his 
native place, where he was married, June 14, 1611, to Ursula 
Langridge, of the same locality. He was the only surviving 
son of his father John Gyll, who lived at Sutton-at-Hone, and 
was buried there in 1624; a lineal descendant of John Gyll, 
Esq., of Widdial, Herts, Lord of the Manor and Patron of the 

s 






226 


WILLIAM GYLL, ESQ. 


Church, until his decease in 1546. A branch of his family also 
resided at Eltham, Kent, and bore in the heraldic visitations 
the armorial ensigns of the Gylls of Herts. 

Mr. G-yll came to London, in 1737, from his native spot, 
Maidstone, which he subsequently endowed, as is seen by the 
list of benefactors in the church there, and was immediately 
associated in commercial relations with his relative, James 
Brooke, Esq., of Lewisham, Kent, High Sheriff of that shire, 
in 1731, and afterwards High Sheriff of London, in 1738; son 
of Richard Brooke, Esq. of Hoo, Kent, a branch of the Cobham 
family of the same place. 

In 1747, the subject of these memoirs became a freeman 
of the Stationers’ Company and of the City of London. On the 
decease of his uncle, Mr. James Brooke, in 1750, he succeeded 
to the bulk of his possessions; and from this time he contracted 
a partnership with another relative, Thomas Wright, Esq., of 
Dulwich, Surrey, who also married Ann, sister of Mr. Gyll, in 
1746. This gentleman, son of Edward Wright, Esq., of Al¬ 
dington, Kent, held a distinguished position in the City, and 
was elected to the office of Lord Mayor in 1785, and that of 
High Sheriff of London, in 1780, a year during which those 
awful tumults disturbed the quiet of the citizens, and menaced 
the very existence of the capital—better known as the Lord 
George Gordon riots. These, Mr. Wright, with his official 
coadjutors, repressed with dignity, firmness, and efficacy; and 
thus their fortitude contributed to restore peace to the city and 
obedience to the laws. During the year 1752, Mr. Gyll married 
Elizabeth, eldest daughter and co-heir of Robert Prowse Hassel, 
Esq., of Wyrardsbury House, Bucks; and, at his demise, in 1760, 
he succeeded to liis purparty, or fourth shares of his estates ; 
and purchasing the interests of the remaining co-heirs, in Bucks, 
he settled in the seat of his wife’s ancestors, to which they came 
in 1696. In the meanwhile success crowned his labours, and 
his approved integrity induced the citizens to elect him to all the 
municipal offices in their rotation. He became Alderman of 
Walbrook Ward; he filled the office of High Sheriff, in 1781 ; 



















WILLIAM GYLL, ESQ. 


227 


and soon afterwards became Treasurer and Governor of Christ’s 
Hospital, which he liberally endowed, having presided fifteen 
years: and in 1793, the College at Hertford, connected with 
that establishment, was by him repaired and embellished—all 
at his own outlay. His son, Robert Hutton Gyll, Esq. (who 
died, unmarried, 1792) gave £200 to Christ’s Hospital; and his 
son-in-law, Archibald Paxton, Esq. of Watford Place, Herts, 
gave a similar donation. 

•With unusual unanimity he was appointed to the civic chair, 
in 1788. When the terrible calamity of mental aberration 
which had so seriously afflicted George III., ceased to operate 
on the royal patient, the Lord Mayor convened the court of 
Aldermen, to determine in what manner the citizens should 
attend his majesty on his proposed pilgrimage to St. Paul’s 
Cathedral, on the 23rd of April ; that being the day selected 
for the general thanksgiving. The Lord Mayor, with the two 
Sheriffs and the Recorder of London, repaired to Windsor 
Castle to present the City address, and their combined con¬ 
gratulations on his Majesty’s happy restoration ; previous to 
which, it was duly announced in the daily journals, that the 
chief functionary of the City was to be created a Baronet, 
which is customary when royalty visits that section of the 
metropolitan dominions; besides which auspicious event, Mr. 
Gyll had ever been a favourite with the Right Honourable 
W. Pitt, having attended his Majesty more than three times 
before he had quite passed half through his office. On the 
18th of April, 1789, the newspapers (“ London Chronicle” 
and “Public Advertiser”), stated, “The Lord Mayor is to be 
made a Baronet; intimation of which has been given, and 
the ‘ letters patent ’ already prepared, will be announced in the 
‘Gazette’ immediately previous to the day of thanksgiving.” 
Some family reasons, however, frustrated the acceptance of the 
proffered dignity, which was not conferred; and though subse¬ 
quently the expected honour was promised to his son, William 
Gyll, Esq., Captain of the 2nd Life Guards, and 1st Equerry 
to H.R.II. the late Duke of Sussex, who, at his own expense, 






228 


WILLIAM GYLL, ESQ. 


and with the cordial concurrence of his sovereign, raised two 
troops of cavalry, pending the premeditated invasion, in 1802; 
an early and unexpected death prevented his family from 
securing the rank destined for them. 

On the morning of the thanksgiving, between eleven and 
twelve o’clock, the King’s carriage arrived at Temple Bar, 
where Mr. Gyll, having previously mounted his charger, offi¬ 
cially presented to his Majesty the City Sword ; the King 
most condescendingly restored the emblem of power with this 
gracious salutation, “ My Lord, it cannot be in better hands: 

I hope your Lordship is quite well.” The Lord Mayor then 
rode before his Majesty, bare-headed, to St. Paul’s Cathedral, 
bearing the sword, amidst the acclamations of the spectators. 

The ceremony finished at the Cathedral, the City dignitaries 
resumed their places in the Cortege, and the Lord Mayor, 
arrayed in an ample gown of crimson velvet that covered his 
proud steed’s neck, attended, as the custom is, by grooms on 
either side, and accompanied by the sheriffs on their horses, 
richly caparisoned in blue and gold, with tassels of golden 
fringe, their bridles ornamented with the words, “ God save the 
King,” re-conducted their Majesties, with a train of the court, 
and civil and military functionaries, to the limits of the City at 
Temple Bar. 

In the evening of that day, the Lord Mayor entertained the 
Court of Aldermen and their Ladies at the Mansion-House. 

During the period in which Mr. Gyll filled the exalted 
station of Lord Mayor, he demeaned himself with great firm¬ 
ness and dignity, and retired from the chair amidst the plaudits 
of his-fellow-citizens. His desire to fulfil the duties of his office, 
and his ready access, on all occasions, where his presence was 
requisite, were principles in the execution of his magistracy, 
which, added to his knowledge of mankind, endeared him to the 
praise and esteem of the people. Mr. Gyll had cultivated, amidst 
the engagements of his vocation, various kinds of literature, and 
specimens extant of his poetic attainments evince his capacity 
for it, had the full powers of his intelligent mind been concen- 
































AYILLIAM GYLL, ESQ. 


229 


trated on the art. His zeal in all his commercial relations 
increased the circle of his friends, whilst it augmented his 
wealth ; and the evening of his days was passed in the village 
of Wyrardsbury, where he retired from the enjoyment of civic 
grandeur, and aspirations after earthly glory. 

“ And the small quiet hamlet where he dwelt. 

Was one of that complexion which seems made 
For those who their mortality have felt.” 

Although his constitution, excellent by nature, was corro¬ 
borated by habitual temperance, yet time and physical ailments 
(those remembrancers of mortality, and deep-toned monitors of 
approaching dissolution), assailed, and, at length, precipitated 
him into the silent tomb; not without awakening his sensibilities 
and hopes of future felicity, on which he had fixed his thoughts 
while in the flower of strength and manhood’s pride. 

His decease took place on Saturday, the 17th of March, 1798, 
in his 75th year; and he departed sincerely lamented by all who 
knew him, and justly revered by a family whom he had early 
instructed to walk in the narrow path which leadeth unto life. 

He was interred in his own family vault, in the chancel of 
Wyrardsbury Church ; and, while a handsome monument of 
statuary marble is erected to his memory, his private history 
and his active virtues will transmit his character as among the 
best heirlooms of his posterity. He left a widow, Mary, daughter 
of John Broome, Esq., of Ludlow, Salop, who followed him in 
1820, to the same narrow resting-place ; and their son, William 
Gyll, who married, in 1794, Lady Harriet Flemyng, daughter 
and heir of the ninth and last Earl of Wigtown, died in 1806, 
leaving issue, residents in the same village, to whom the parish 
is indebted for many improvements ; and the Village Church, 
the pride of the spot, embellished with various elegant monu¬ 
ments of the Gyll family, is also enriched with a beautiful 
stained glass window of mosaic and scrollage pattern, similar 
to a window once in a church at Cologne on the Rhine, which 
was presented by a member of the family, and is more fully 
detailed by Dr. Lipscomb, the historian of the county of Bucks. 

























SIR EDWARD OSBORNE, 

(lord MAYOR.) 

The claim of Sir Edward Osborne to be ranked amongst the 
ejninent men who have adorned the history of the City of 
London, rests upon a single gallant deed, performed when its 
author was a mere boy; yet, one which wins our admiration, 
as belonging to a school of heroism far higher than the soul- 
destroying practice of war. Sir William Hewet, a rich merchant 
of London, who served the office of chief magistrate in the 
year 1559, resided at one period on the Old London Bridge. 
Beneath its narrow piers or starlings, the tide of the Thames 
rushed with great impetuosity. It happened, one day, that a 
servant-maid of Sir William Hewet, playing with his only 
daughter, a mere infant, near one of the open windows, 
dropped the child, which was instantly dashed into the foaming 
waters. Edward Osborne, who was then an apprentice in the 
family, immediately plunged into the angry tide ; and, at the 
hazard of his own life, succeeded in restoring the child to its 
parents. From that time, Osborne became one of the family. 
Years rolled by: the child thus gallantly snatched from destruc¬ 
tion, had ripened into the beautiful woman. The wealth of her 
father, not less than her own loveliness, procured for her an 
abundance of suitors; and, amongst others, was numbered the 
proud Earl of Shrewsbury. The gratitude of her father was, 
however, deep and lasting. He rejected their splendid offers 
of alliance, emphatically exclaiming, “ Osborne saved her ; and 
Osborne alone shall enjoy her! ” The troth of the youthful 
couple was plighted at the altar, and Sir William gave his 
daughter a liberal dowry. Edw. Osborne, afterwards knighted, 
served the office of Lord Mayor, in 1583. The Dukes of Leeds 
descended from him. Would that all the aristocracy could look 
back to an equally honorable descent ! 









JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 

(lord mayor). 

If notoriety is fame, and success the sign and constant reward 
of merit, the subject of our memoir was deserving the respect 
of his contemporaries, and is entitled to honorable mention by 
posterity. His warmest admirers will, however, shrink from en¬ 
forcing his claim to the title of patriot, and his greatest enemies 
must fain confess that he has done some service to the cause of 
national liberty. 

He was born, October 17, 1727, O. S. in the parish of John 
Street, Clerkenwell, of respectable parentage, his father having, 
as a distiller, amassed a decent fortune, retired from business 
tolerably early, and resolved to bring up his son John to the 
art of spending it gracefully—a science in which his proficiency 
did great credit to his preceptors. Mr. Nathaniel Wilkes ap¬ 
pears to have been a man of liberal tastes ; for his biographers 
take frequent occasions to speak of the hospitality of his estab¬ 
lishment, and of the countenance which he afforded to the 
literary men—the incubi of that and some succeeding genera¬ 
tions. It is probable that the influence of early associations 
determined, in some degree, the character of his son, who 
continued throughout life warmly attached to the pursuits of 
literature, and was the intimate friend of all the notable men 
of his time. 

His youth seems to have passed in the usual round of studies, 
a quick and shrewd capacity enabling him to master with ease 
the ordinary branches of education ; and having exhausted 
all the learning of his tutors, or grown tired of the monotony 





































232 


JOHN "WILKES, ESQ. 


of home scenes, he repaired to the university of Leyden, where 
his progress attracted the favourable notice of the professors. 
Having completed his allotted tasks, he came home ; and, in his 
twenty-second year, married a lady named Mead, the heiress of 
an ancient family, in the county of Buckingham ; but whether 
it was on account of the disparity of age, the bride being many 
years older than her husband, or from the effects of his rest¬ 
less disposition, it is now impossible to say ; but the marriage 
proved a most unhappy one. They lived together for a short 
time on terms of mutual indifference, and finally separated for 
ever, in 1757. It redounds little to his credit, that Mrs. Wilkes 
was forced to institute legal proceedings against her husband 
for the payment of the annuity guaranteed by the terms of 
separation. 

From this period he turned his attention to the political 
world, and cultivated the acquaintance of the leading men of 
both parties; and never, perhaps, was there a man more calcu¬ 
lated to shine as a partisan of polished address and insinuating 
manners. He found himself a welcome guest in the drawing¬ 
rooms of the leaders of fashion, and omitted no opportunity of 
improving his advantages. Bold and unscrupulous in assertion, 
with a fluent tongue and reckless disposition, he seemed fitted 
by nature to play the part of a demagogue. His vices were all 
of a character for which the public could readily find excuses, 
whilst his virtues were eminently English. It was felt idle to 
assail, on the score of personal conduct, the champion who was 
always ready to proclaim the existence of his own frailties. 
His bitterest opponents could not say harder things of him 
than he was accustomed to say of himself; and hence, whilst 
his powers of mischief were almost unequalled, it was found 
impossible to inflict upon him any thing like measures of reta¬ 
liation. He was one of a small class of persons who never 
calculate upon defeat, and are never broken by adversity. If 
the thread of his purpose were broken, he could take it 
up again at another point. By aiming at all things, he was 
enabled to accomplish much which seemed hard of achievement 





JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 233 

His first appearance as a candidate for parliamentary honours, 
was made when he was only twenty-seven years of age, when 
he stood for the representation of Berwick, but was defeated. 
He was more successful in a second attempt at Aylesbury, for 
which place he was returned member in 1757, and again at the 
general election in 1761. 

Hitherto he had made no figure upon the political stage; but 
had, notwithstanding, contrived to become intimate with Mr. 
Pitt, and others of the opposition, who probably saw, in the 
present rake, the future agitator. The poor remains of his 
patrimony had long since vanished; and he was looked upon as 
a broken and desperate man. It would be too much to repre¬ 
sent him as being prompted wholly by mercenary considerations 
in his choice of party ; but there is the undeniable evidence 
of his own letters against any imputed patriotism of motive. 
Shortly after the publication of the North Briton, we find him 
writing to a friend in the following strain :—“ If Government 
mean peace or friendship with me, I no longer breathe hostility; 
but if they do not find employment for me, I am disposed to 
find employment for them.” 

These extracts give us no very exalted idea of the purity of 
his motives ; and making all due allowance for recklessness of 
speech or expression, we shall be doing full justice to Wilkes, 
when we ascribe his versatility to choice, and his patriotism to 
circumstance. 

His first appearance, as a political writer, was in 1762, when 
he published “ Observations upon a Rupture with Spain,” an 
anonymous pamphlet, which obtained some celebrity. The 
condition of parties at this period was eminently favourable to 
the hopes of an aspiring adventurer. The accession of King 
George the Third had disappointed the hopes of those who had 
been led to expect great things from the first native prince of 
the new dynasty. The' Earl of Bute, to whom private memoirs 
ascribe a position at court which history refuses to recognise, 
was the all-powerful favourite. The ostensible advisers of the 
throne were publicly known to be in a state of the most com- 

T 















234 JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 

plete subjection to irresponsible influence ; and it was only 
beneath the sheltering influence of contempt, that the ministry 
could hope to escape the effects of the popular vengeance. A 
peace had just been concluded with Spain, contrary to the 
general wish of the nation ; and the imposition of heavy taxes 
to defray the charges of the war, roused the public indignation 
to a pitch of absolute frenzy. The opposition, led by the 
famous William Pitt, daily grew in power and boldness ; and 
an ineffectual attempt to form a new administration served only 
to strengthen and consolidate their forces. On the side of the - 
court party, all was vacillation of counsel and mediocrity of 
intellect; whilst their opponents numbered in their ranks the 
ablest men of the age, and were supported by the confidence of 
all classes of the community. 

It is well known that, at the outset of his literary career, 
Wilkes enjoyed the friendship of Pitt and Temple. The in¬ 
trepid daring of his character was of itself sufficient to win for 
him the notice of the dauntless ex-minister; and he must have 
looked with complacency upon the deadly wounds inflicted by 
his new and formidable gladiator upon their common enemy. 
The vices of the man were lost sight of in the contemplation of 
the services performed by the champion of liberty. There were 
many as notorious for their want of morals; but who could 
boast of having done such service to the cause of freedom ? 

For upwards of a century the power of issuing general warrants 
had been exercised by successive ministers for the suppression of 
all opinion which was distasteful to the ruling powers. It was 
not necessary to specify the names of the parties about to be 
arrested, nor to found any preliminary charge before a justice 
of the peace. The minister was the sole judge of the crime, 
and the sole dispenser of punishment; and it is easy to con¬ 
ceive, that with a servile parliament, and the aid of such an 
engine of oppression, the authority of an able statesman might 
bear down all opposition. The mere suspicion of a design to 
interfere with the repose of the existing order of things, was 
held to be a sufficient reason for the exercise of this terrible 


T 








JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


235 


power ; and repeated instances had shown the extent of its 
influence in the way of silencing an obnoxious writer, or getting 
rid of a dangerous mob orator. In those days of unlimited 
license of speech, it is hardly possible to form an idea of the 
state of bondage in which thoughts were held only a half- 
century since. 

The first number of the North Briton was commenced in June 
1762, under the avowed editorship of Wilkes; and, for a great 
period, its existence was only remarkable for his fierce invec¬ 
tives against the Scotch ministry and the Scotch nation. To 
such an extent was this apparent antipathy carried, that a 
gentleman belonging to the other side of the Tweed felt himself 
bound to challenge the writer in the name of his injured coun¬ 
trymen, and but for the intervention of accidental circum¬ 
stances, the meeting would no doubt have -taken place. It is 
not likely that Wilkes was prompted in his abuse of Scotland 
by any other than merely political considerations, and a desire 
to gratify the public, who at this time abhorred the very name 
of a North Briton ; for we find him afterwards relating an 
anecdote of a prior date, which we give in his own words, 
“ When I was at Inverary on a visit to my old friend Archibald, 
Duke of Argyle, his dependents congratulated me upon being 
such a favourite of his Grace ; I said, it is then, gentlemen, 
truly lucky for me ; for if I had displeased the Duke, and he 
had wished it, there is not a Campbell amongst you but would 
have been ready to bring John Wilkes’s head to him in a 
charger. It would have been only— 

“ Off with his head ; so much for Aylesbury.” 

The paper had been established but for a few months, and 
had reached no further than the twelfth number, when it in¬ 
volved him in a quarrel with Lord Talbot: which ultimately 
led to a duel. Lord Litchfield as well as Lord Talbot bears a 
part in the paper, the chief assault against Lord Talbot being a 
sneer upon his horsemanship at the coronation. His lordship 
was highly offended, and demanded, first by a note, and then 
by a message, a disavowal, on the part of Mr. Wilkes, of his 































236 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


being concerned in the composition of the number, which re¬ 
flected upon his lordship’s name. Wilkes, to whose views an 
affair of this sort was not ill-suited, contented himself with a 
denial of his lordship’s right to interrogate him upon the subject. 
An appointment was made between them, and they exchanged 
pistol-shots at Bagshot, without hurt to either party. Mr. 
Wilkes having fired, “walked immediately up to Lord Talbot, 
and avowed the paper.” 

Mr. Wilkes was now becoming more known, and, from his 
opposition to Lord Bute, obtained great favour with the public. 
The North Briton still went on, and Mr. Wilkes also became 
possessed of a most able coadjutor in Churchill, the poet. In 
March, 1763, he addressed a dedication to Lord Bute, prefixed 
to the tragedy of Roger Mortimer, an unfinished play of Ben 
Jonson. Between Mortimer, the favourite of Isabel, the 
mother of Edward III. and Lord Bute, he drew a parallel neces¬ 
sarily not very favourable to the character of that nobleman. 

Down to the publication of the 45th number, the North 
Briton had only been satirical and scurrilous ; but Wilkes now 
flew at higher game, and ventured to assail the King’s reputa¬ 
tion for veracity. The article itself is now a literary as well as 
a political curiosity, and we therefore extract the famous libel 
for the benefit of our readers: 

“ The King’s speech has always been considered by the 
legislature, and the public at large, as the speech of the minis¬ 
ter. It has regularly, at the beginning of every session of par¬ 
liament, been referred by both houses to the consideration of a 
committee, and has been generally canvassed with the utmost 
freedom, when the minister of the crown has been obnoxious to 
the nation. The ministers of this free country, conscious of 
the undoubted privileges of so spirited a people, and with the 
terrors of parliament before their eyes, have ever been cautious, 
no less with regard to the matter than to the expression of 
speeches , which they advised the sovereign to make from the 
throne, at the opening of each session. They well knew that 
an honest house of parliament, true to their trust, could not 




























JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


237 


fail to detect tlie fallacious arts, or to remonstrate against the 
daring acts of violence committed by any minister. The speech 
at the close of the session has ever been considered as the most 
secure method of promulgating the favourite court-creed among 
the vulgar, because the parliament, which is the constitutional 
guardian of the liberties of the people, has, in this case, no 
opportunity of remonstrating, or of impeaching any wicked 
servant of the crown. 

“ This week has given the public the most abandoned in¬ 
stance of ministerial effrontery ever attempted to be imposed 
on mankind. The minister's speech of last Tuesday is not to 
be paralleled in the annals of this country. I am in doubt 
whether the imposition is greater on the sovereign, or on the 
nation. Every friend of his country must lament, that a prince 
of so many great and amiable qualities, whom England truly 
reveres, can be brought to give the sanction of his sacred name 
to the most odious measures, and to the most unjustifiable 
public declarations, from a throne ever renowned for truth, 
honour, and unsullied virtue. 

“I am sure all foreigners, especially the King of Prussia, will 
hold the minister in contempt and abhorrence. He has made 
our sovereign declare, my expectations have been fully answered 
by the happy effects which the several allies oj my crown have 
derived from this salutary measure of the definitive treaty. The 
powers at war with my good brother, the Kbig oj Prussia, have 
been induced to agree to such terms of accommodation as that 
great prince has approved; and the success which has attended 
my negotiation has necessarily and immediately diffused the 
blessmgs of peace through every part of Europe. The infamous 
fallacy of this whole sentence is apparent to all mankind : for 
it is known, that the King of Prussia did not barely approve, 
but absolutely dictated, as conqueror, every article of the terms 
of peace. No advantage of any kind has accrued to that mag¬ 
nanimous prince from our negotiation, but he was basely 
deserted by the Scottish prime minister of England. He was 
known by every court in Europe to be scarcely on better terms 






































238 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


* 

of friendship here than at Vienna , and he was betrayed by us 
in the treaty of peace. What a strain of insolence, therefore, 
is it in a minister to lay claim to what he is conscious all his 
efforts tended to prevent, and meanly to arrogate to himself a 
share in the fame and glory of one of the greatest princes the 
world has ever seen. The King of Prussia, however, has glo¬ 
riously kept all his former conquests , and stipulated security for 
his allies, even for the Elector of Hanover. I know in what 
light this great prince is considered in Europe, and in what 
manner he has been treated here ; among other reasons, per¬ 
haps, for some contemptuous expressions he may have used of 
the Scot —expressions which are every day echoed by the whole 
body of Englishmen through the southern part of this island. 

“ The Preliminary Articles of Peace wrre such as have drawn 
the contempt of mankind on our wretcjr - d negotiations. All 
our most valuable conquests were agreed to be restored, and 
the East India Company would have been infallibly ruined by 
a single article of this fallacious and baneful negotiation. No 
hireling of the minister has been hardy enough to dispute this ; 
yet the minister himself has made our sovereign declare the 
satisfaction which he felt at the approaching re-establishment of 
peace upon conditions so honourable to liis crotvn, and so bene¬ 
ficial to his people. As to the entire approbation of parliament, 
which is so vainly boasted of, the world knows how that was 
obtained. The large debt on the Civil List , already above half 
a year in arrear, shows pretty clear the transactions of the 
winter. It is, however, remarkable, that the minister’s speech 
dwells on the entire approbation given by parliament to the 
Preliminary Articles , which, I will venture to say, he must by 
this time be ashamed of; for he has been brought to confess the 
total want of that knowledge, accuracy, and precision, by which 
such immense advantages, both of trade and territory, were 
sacrificed to our inveterate enemies. These gross blunders are, 
indeed, in some measure set right by the Definitive Treaty; 
yet, the most important articles relative to cessions, commerce, 
and the fishery> remain as they were with respect to the French. 




















JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


239 


The proud and feeble Spaniard, too, does not renounce, but 
only desists from all pretensions which he may have formed, to 
the right of fishing —where ? Only about, the island of Neiv- 
foundland —till a favourable opportunity arises of insisting on 
it, there, as well as elsewhere. 

“ The minister cannot forbear, even in the King's Speech, 
insulting us with a dull repetition of the word economy. I 
did not expect so soon to hear that word again, after it had 
been so lately exploded, and more than once by a most nume¬ 
rous audience hissed off the stage of our English theatres. It is 
held in derision by the voice of the people, and every tongue 
loudly proclaims the universal contempt in which these empty 
professions are held by this nation. Let the public be in¬ 
formed of a single inst mce of economy, except, indeed, in the 
household. Is a reg' mt which was completed as to its com¬ 
plement of officers on the Tuesday, and broke on the Thursday, 
a proof of economy ? Is the pay of the Scottish Master Elliot to 
be voted by an English parliament, under the head of economy ? 
Is this, among a thousand others, one of the convincing proofs 
of a firm resolution to form government on a plan of strict 
economy ? Is it not notorious that in the reduction of the army, 
not the least attention has been paid to it ? Many unnecessary 
expenses have been incurred, only to increase the power of the 
crown, that is, to create more lucrative jobs for the creatures of 
the minister. The staff indeed is broke, but the discerning 
part of mankind immediately comprehended the mean subter¬ 
fuge, and resented the indignity put upon so brave an officer as 
Marshal Ligonier. That step was taken to give the whole 
power of the army to the crown, that is, to the minister. Lord 
Ligonier is now no longer at the head of the army, but Lord Bute 
in effect is ; I mean, that every preferment given by the crown 
will be found still to be obtained by his enormous influence, 
and to be bestowed only on the creatures of the Scottish fac¬ 
tion. The nation is still in the same deplorable state while he 
governs, and can make the tools of his power pursue the same 
odious measures. Such a retreat, as he intends, can only mean 



































240 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


the personal indemnity, which, I hope, guilt will never find 
from an injured nation. The negotiation of the late inglorious 
peace and excise will haunt him wherever he goes, and the 
terrors of the just resentment, which he must be sure to meet 
from a brave and insulted people, and which must finally crush 
him, will be for ever before his eyes. 

“ In vain will such a minister, or the foul dregs of his power, 
the tools of corruption and despotism, preach up in the speech 
that spirit of concord, and that obedience to the laws, which is 
essential to good order. They have sent the spirit of discord 
through the land, and I will prophecy, that it will never be 
extinguished, but by the extinction of their power. Is the 
spirit of concord to go hand in hand with the peace and excise, 
through this nation ? Is it to be expected between an insolent 
exciseman, and a peer, gentleman, freeholder, or farmer, whose 
private houses are now made liable to be entered, and searched 
at pleasure? Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, and, in general, 
all the cider counties, are not surely the several counties which 
are alluded to in the speech. The spirit of concord hath not 
gone forth among them, but the spirit of liberty has, and a 
noble opposition has been given to the wicked instruments of 
oppression. A nation, as sensible as the English, will see that 
a spirit of concord, when they are oppressed, means a tame 
submission to inj ury, and that a spirit of liberty ought then to 
arise, and I am sure ever will, in proportion to the weight of 
the grievance they feel. Every legal attempt of a contrary 
tendency to the spirit of concord will be deemed a justifiable 
resistance, warranted by the spirit of the English constitution. 

“ A despotic minister will always endeavour to dazzle his 
prince with high-flown ideas of the prerogative and honor of 
the crown, which the minister will make a parade of firmly 
maintaining. I wish as much as any man in the kingdom to 
see the honour of the crown maintained in a manner truly be¬ 
coming royalty. I lament to see it sunk even to prostitution. 
What a shame was it to see the security of this country, in 
point of military force, complimented away, contrary to the 






JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


241 


opinion of royalty itself, and sacrificed to the prejudices and 
to the ignorance of a set of people, the most unfit, from every 
consideration, to be consulted on a matter relative to the 
security of the House of Hanover .’ I wish to see the honour 
of the crown religiously asserted, with regard to our allies, 
and the dignity of it scrupulously maintained, with regard to 
foreign princes. Is it possible such an indignity can have hap¬ 
pened, such a sacrifice of the honour of the crown of England, 
as that a minister should already have kissed his majesty’s hand 
on being appointed to the most insolent and ungrateful court 
in the world, without a previous assurance of that reciprocal 
nomination, which the meanest court in Europe would insist 
upon, before she proceeded to an act otherwise so derogatory 
to her honour ? But electoral policy lias ever been obsequious 
to the court of Vienna, and forgets the insolence with which 
Count Colleredo left England. Upon a principle of dignity 
and economy, Lord Stormont, a Scottish peer of the loyal 
house of Murray, kissed his majesty’s hand, I think, on 
Wednesday, in the Easter week ; but this ignominious act has 
not yet disgraced the nation in the London Gazette. The 
ministry are not ashamed of doing the thing in private; they 
are only afraid of the publication. Was it a tender regard for 
the honours of the late kings, or of his present majesty, that 
invited to court Lord George Sackville, in these first days of 
peace, to share in the general satisfaction, which all good 
courtiers received in the indignity offered to Lord Lig order, 

and on the advancement of -? Was this to show 

princely gratitude to the eminent services of the accomplished 
general of the House of Brunswick, who has had so great a 
share in rescuing Europe from the yoke of France; and whose 
nephew we hope soon to see made happy in the possession of 
the most amiable princess in the world ? Or, is it meant to 
assert the honour of the crown only against the united wishes 
of a loyal and affectionate people, founded in a happy experi¬ 
ence of the talents, ability, integrity, and virtue of those who 
have had the glory of redeeming their country from bondage 

u 


























242 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


and ruin, in order to support, by every art of corruption and 

intimidation, a weak, disjointed, incapable set of. 

I will call them anything but ministers —by whom the favourite 
still meditates to rule this kingdom with a rod of iron. 

“ The Stuart line has ever been intoxicated with the slavish 
doctrines of the absolute , independent , unlimited power of the 
crown. Some of that line were so weakly advised, as to 
endeavour to reduce them into practice: but the English nation 
was too spirited to suffer the least encroachment on the ancient 
liberties of this kingdom. c The King of England is only the 
first magistrate of this country ; but is invested by the law 
with the whole executive power. He is, however, responsible 
to his people for the due execution of the royal functions, in 
the choice of ministers, &c. equal with the meanest of his 
subjects in his particular duty.’ The personal character of 
our present amiable sovereign makes us easy and happy that 
so great a power is lodged in such hands ; the favourite has 
given too just cause for him to escape the general odium. The 
prerogative of the crown is to exert the constitutional powers 
entrusted to it in a way not of blind favour and partiality, but 
of wisdom and judgment. This is the spirit of our constitu¬ 
tion. The people, too, have their prerogative, and I hope' the 
fine words of Dryden will be engraven on our hearts: 

“ ‘Freedom is the English subjects prerogative.’” 

The ministry immediately laid this number before the attorney 
and solicitor general, at that time Mr. Charles Yorke, and Sir 
Fletcher Norton, for their opinions upon it. They answered, 
“ that in their opinion, the paper was an infamous and seditious 
libel; tending to inflame the minds, and alienate the affections 
of the people from his majesty, and excite to traitorous insur¬ 
rections against his government.” The ministry were highly 
gratified by this ; for, under the pretence of vindicating the 
throne, they had now an opportunity to revenge their own 
private injuries. They resolved to prosecute, with the utmost 
severity, the authors, printers, and publishers of this offensive 

























JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


243 


paper. The secretary of state for the home department (Lord 
Halifax,) issued a general warrant, without any information 
upon oath, and in which only the publisher was mentioned by 
name; he says, seize “ the authors, printers, and publishers,” 
with their papers, and bring them before his lordship. 

The first person seized by the authority of this warrant, was 
Mr. Dryden Leach, printer, in Crane-court, Fleet-street. The 
messengers entered his house in the night, and took him out of 
bed from his wife, while his child lay dangerously ill in the 
room. They likewise seized all his papers, and apprehended 
even his journeymen and servants. Though all this was done, 
Mr. Leach, in fact, had no concern, immediate or remote, with 
either the printing or publishing of the North Briton: and he 
was confined several days after his innocence was perfectly 
known. Somebody had told Carrington the messenger, that 
Mr. Wilkes had been seen going into Leach’s house ; and this 
was all the foundation which they had for taking the latter 
gentleman, and all his workmen, &c. in custody. 

On the same morning, (which was the 29tli of April) the 
same messengers, acting under the same warrant, apprehended 
Mr. Kearsley, who was the real publisher of the North Briton; 
together with all his servants, his papers and accompt books. 
They were taken to the secretary of state’s office; and Mr. 
Kearsley was examined before Lord Llalifax, and Lord Egre- 
mont, (the other secretary of state,) but not upon oath. He 
gave them all the information he possessed: that Mr. Richard 
Balfe, in the Old Bailey, was the printer of the North Briton; 
that Mr. Wilkes gave orders for the printing; that Mr. 
Churchill (the poet,) received the profits arising from the sale: 
of the author he could say nothing. The very same general 
warrant was now issued a third time ; for taking Mr. Balfe, 
and all his workmen, and his papers. Mr. Balfe was the forty- 
eighth person attached by this precept. At his examination, 
he was reserved, and said very little: he was not upon oath. 
Mr. Philip Carteret Webb, (at this time solicitor to the 
treasury,) and Mr. Lovell Stanhope, (law-clerk to the secretary 


























































244 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


of state,) who were both present, declaring that the publishers 
evidence was sufficient to justify any proceeding against Mr. 
Wilkes as the author of the paper—upon this opinion, the 
warrant was sent out a fourth time. By the return before made, 
this famous warrant had already done more than its duty, and, 
therefore, it was clearly functus officio. Every justice of peace 
knows, that to apprehend Mr. Wilkes, another warrant should 
have been issued: and it is certain, that Lord Halifax thought 
this measure necessary, and intended to put Mr. Wilkes’s name 
in such new warrant; but Mr. Webb said, another warrant 
was not at all necessary—and as to the naming of Mr. Wilkes, 
he added, with an emphasis, it w r as better not. Lord Egremont 
gave the messengers verbal orders; and on the 29tli of April, 
1763, at midnight, the messengers of government entered the 
house of Mr. Wilkes, and, producing their warrant, requested 
him to accompany them, to prove the document specified; 
namely, that the officers were empowered to seize the author, 
printer, and publislier of a certain seditious libel, contained 
in a certain page, published under the title of the North 
Briton, and, taking an objection to its legality, he absolutely 
refused obedience to its power ? The officers, confounded 
by this continual resistance, returned for fresh instructions ; 
and, being met with positive commands from the secretary 
of state, to take Wilkes into custody, they executed their 
mission on the following morning, and having conveyed their 
prisoner to the Tower, they sealed up his papers, and conveyed 
them to the secretary, when the following orders were issued 
by the Lieutenant Governor. 

“ That the warders appointed to keep a close prisoner, shall 
not presume to leave him for a moment alone, either night or 
day, or to change their duty with other warders, but by par¬ 
ticular law or order from the constable, lieutenant, deputy-lieu¬ 
tenant, or, in their absence, the major of the tower. 

“ They are to permit no person to have admittance into the 
room he is confined in, or to speak to him, but by particular 
order brought them by the major, or gentleman goaler.” 


























JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


245 


The major had likewise a written order, to take down the 
names of all persons who applied for admittance to Mr. 
Wilkes. But their triumph was but of short duration ; a writ of 
Habeas Corpus was immediately issued in the court of Common 
Pleas, and the order of the judge, directed to the constable 
of the Tower, commanding him to bring up the body of the 
prisoner, was promptly obeyed. The case was argued in 
Westminster. The counsel for the defendent denied the 
legality of general warrants, and after the attorney general’s 
reply on the part of the crown, Mr. Wilkes was re¬ 
manded back to prison, and the 6th of May appointed for 
the judges to deliver their opinion. The court was crowded 
to excess by the members of both houses of parliament, and 
a very deliberate judgment was delivered by Chief Justice 
Pratt, afterwards known as the celebrated Lord Camden. The 
commitment itself was declared to be lawful, per se , being 
sanctioned by innumerable precedents, but it was held that 
the privileges of parliament had been violated in the person of 
the defendant, who could only be arrested for treason, felony, or 
breach of the peace, and, therefore, the court discharged him out 
of custody. The primary hope of government was thus defeated, 
but there were other means of vengeance within their reach; 
an order from the secretary of state, dismissed him from the 
command of the Buckinghamshire militia, and the attorney 
general commenced a vigorous prosecution against him for a 
libel. Wilkes, on his part, was not idle. lie made no secret 
of his intention to brave to the utmost the whole force of 
the ministry ; and finding that few printers cared to involve 
themselves in the hazards of his political experiments, he set 
up a printing press himself, and continued the publication of 
the North Briton as usual. 

The influence of the press in its present signification, 
was at that time unknown, the Times “ leading article ” had 
not been invented, and even the debates in parliament 
were timidly reported, the names of the speakers being mostly 
disguised, and their noblest thoughts frequently emasculated. 





















246 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


The only mode by which opinions could be disseminated was 
in the shape of a pamphlet, the circulation of which was of 
course confined to the metropolis, and the few towns which 
could boast of a mass of educated persons. It was not until 
a later period, that the holders of political power discovered 
the great secret that talent always carries an antidote to the 
wounds it inflicts, and that the brain of man is a saleable article. 
At the time of which we write, the assault of a man of genius 
upon the character of an administration, could only be stifled 
by a prosecution, or answered by a bribe. 

The interval between his release from the Tower, and the 
meeting of parliament, was spent by Wilkes in France; and 
the pages of the North Briton bore needful testimony to the 
favour of his opposition to the established order of things. As 
he was accustomed to deal as freely with the characters of in¬ 
dividuals, as with the measures of government, he got involved 
in frequent quarrels, and only escaped the hazards of fighting 
abroad, to engage in a contest at home. Two days after the 
opening of the ensuing session, he “ went out” with Mr. 
Martin, the late secretary of the treasury, whom he had 
attacked in a former number of his paper, and at the first 
fire was dangerously wounded in the groin. . His absence 
from the house at this period was extremely unfortunate, for 
the minister, Mr. Grenville, aware that he intended to com¬ 
plain of a breach of privilege, resolved to forestal him by 
bringing down a message from the king, to the effect “that 
his Majesty having received information that John Wilkes, 
Esq. a member of the house, was the author of a most seditious 
and dangerous libel, he had caused the said John Wilkes, Esq. 
to be apprehended and secured, in order to take his trial in the 
course of law; and Mr. Wilkes having been discharged out of 
custody by the court of Common Pleas, on account of his privilege 
as a member of the house, and having since refused to answer 
any information filed against him by his Majesty’s attorney 
general, his Majesty, desirous to show all possible attention to 
the privileges of the House of Commons, and at the same time 

















JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


247 


solicitous not to suffer the public justice of the kingdom to be 
eluded, had chosen to direct the said libel, and also copies of 
the examination, upon which Mr. Wilkes was apprehended and 
secured, to be laid before them; and the minister then laid 
the papers on the table. The government had justly calculated 
upon the result of this step, but the message was met with able 
and indignant remonstrances on the part of the opposition. The 
debate was animated in the extreme, and it was urged that Mr. 
Wilkes had taken no greater liberties with the King’s speech 
than wholesome custom and the necessity of the case warranted 
him in doing. The spirit had always been considered that of the 
ministry, and had been commented upon as such in all instances, 
with justifiable freedom. But this kind of reasoning was not 
suited to the tastes of the majority; a resolution, that “the 
North Briton, No. 45, is a false, scandalous and seditious libel, 
manifestly tending to obliterate the affections of the people from 
his Majesty, and to excite them to traitorous insurrections,” and 
ordering it to be burnt by the “ common hangman,” was carried 
by overwhelming numbers. The quarrel had now become a 
national one, and if, on the one hand, his adversaries employed 
the whole force of the government to silence his opposition, 
Wilkes was not less diligent in enlisting, upon his side, every 
kind of force which could aid his design of inflicting as much 
mischief as possible. No legal opinion having as yet been 
given as to the propriety of the late proceedings in the eye of 
the law, he made his formal complaint to the house, of a breach 
of privilege in his person, by his seizure, the plunder of his 
house, and the carrying off his papers, and the serving him 
with a subpoena, upon an information in the court of King’s 
Bench. The complaint was perfectly regular, and the court 
party had no choice, but to consent to fix a day for its dis¬ 
cussion, which was appointed to come on two days afterwards; 
but within a few hours the duel had been fought, and the 
cause of liberty was nigh suffering a disastrous eclipse in the 
death of its dauntless defender. In consequence of this un¬ 
toward event, the debate was adjourned, but the ministry 
























248 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


were resolved to push their advantages to the uttermost. r Ihe 
physicians of the commons were ordered to attend and examine 
the state of his health, and report the result, but on repairing 
to his house they were refused admittance. The speaker then 
commanded his attendance in his place, but the mandate of that 
officer was treated with equal contempt, and betaking himself 
to France, his accustomed place of refuge, he left the commons 
to work their pleasure, whilst his agents at home were actively 
prosecuting an action in the court of Common Pleas, against the 
secretary of state, for the illegal seizure of their client’s effects 
and papers. 

On the 23rd of November, the consideration of the king’s 
message was resumed, and in a spirit of the basest servility; 
it was affirmed, in direct opposition to the decision of the Com¬ 
mon Pleas, “ that the privileges of parliament does not extend 
to the case of libel, and an address was presented to his Majesty, 
in which the peers coincided, expressing their detestation of 
these seditious practices, and their warm affection for his person 
and government. But the resolution called forth the indignant 
eloquence of Mr. Pitt, who caused himself to be carried from 
a sick bed, in order that he might have an opportunity of rais¬ 
ing his voice against such a declaration; no man, he said, 
could execrate the libel more than himself, but he would come 
at the author fairly, and not by a sacrifice of their constitutional 
privileges, and, by subjecting every member who did not vote 
with the minister to the dread and danger of imprisonment, 
and in such circumstances, how could a parliament be free or 
bold, or honest? To talk of the abuse of privilege, was to 
attack the very being and life of parliament. It was an 
arraignment of the justice and honour of parliament, to suppose 
that they would protect any criminal whatever. The dignity of 
parliaments called upon ministers to support and protect the 
purity of his Majesty’s character; this they had done by a strong 
and decisive condemnation of the libel in question, the risk be¬ 
longed to the courts below. In the house of Lords the opposi¬ 
tion was equally vigorous, a majority was of course attained 
























JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


249 


by government; but no less than seventeen peers of the highest 
rank, recorded a solemn protest against the conduct of the lower 
house, and declared that it was “ incompatible with the dignity, 
gravity and justice of the House of Peers, thus to explain away 
a parliamentary privilege of such magnitude and importance, 
founded in the wisdom of ages, declared with precision in their 
standing orders, repeatedly confirmed, and hitherto preserved, 
inviolable by the spirit of his ancestors.” Whilst the House of 
Commons was thus cheerfully sacrificing their best privileges, 
a more potent element of strife was imparted into the struggle; 
the^people took up the cause of the weakest with unanimous 
eagerness, and all the methods by which popular sympathy is 
displayed, were resorted to over the whole kingdom. In Lon¬ 
don, the ferment, as naturally might be expected, was of a 
dangerous’character ; the sheriffs, pursuant to the vote of the 
House of Commons, attempted to burn the North Briton at the 
Royal Exchange; but the mob rose, attacked the hangman, from 
whose hands they rescued the paper; and the sheriffs, assailed on 
all sides, were only too glad to escape with their lives. This 
daring outrage provoked still further the anger of the Govern¬ 
ment ; the most effectual measures were resorted to for suppress¬ 
ing any further signs of public feeling in the wrong direction, 
and the House of Commons resolved that the rioters were 
“ perturbators of the public peace, dangerous to the liberties of 
the country, and obstructors of the public justice.” 

But there was another tribunal at which the maxims of 
justice were not construed according to the arbitrary will of a 
ministry. Wilkes had lost no time in instituting proceedings 
against the Under Secretary of State for the seizure of his 
papers. The cause came on for trial on the 6th Dec. 1763, 
before Lord Chief Justice Pratt, and a special jury; and the 
judge, having now had leisure to make himself thoroughly 
acquainted with the law, as it bore against the case, pronounced 
ffeneral warrants to be illegal, and consequently said the whole 

O 

of the proceedings were unlawful. The decision of the Chief 
Justice was given, as his Lordship stated, in submission to 

x 













































250 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


the opinions of the other judges, and of the highest judicial 
authority, the House of Peers. “ If,” said he, “ these superior 
jurisdictions should declare my opinion erroneous, I submit, as 
will become me, and kiss the rod; but I must say, I shall always 
consider it a rod of iron for the chastisement of the people of 
Great Britain.” After such a charge, the verdict of the jury 
could not be doubtful, and they accordingly found for the plain¬ 
tiff, giving a thousand pounds damages and full costs. The 
result filled the popular party with ecstasy; and it was gene¬ 
rally thought that the court would be glad of a decent pretext 
to escape out of the affair. But Wilkes was destined to furnish 
another illustration of the justice of the great poet’s maxim:— 

“ The gods are just; and of our pleasant vices, 

Make instruments to scourge us.” 

Having succeeded thus far beyond his expectations, he went 
over to France for the Christmas vacation, and from thence 
forwarded medical certificates of his inability to attend in his 
place in the House to meet the charge of libel. It was resolved, 
however, to proceed in his absence with the evidence ; and, on 
the 29th of January, after a long and vehement debate, it was 
resolved, “ That John Wilkes, Esq. was guilty of writing and 
publishing the paper, entitled the North Briton, No. 45, and 
that for this offence he be expelled from his seat in this 
House.” 

On the same day, the Earl of Sandwich, a nobleman remark¬ 
able neither for the extent of his capacity nor the purity of his 
morals, brought under the notice of the House of Lords, a 
pamphlet of a grossly indecent nature, called, “ An Essay on 
Woman,” and printed by Wilkes, in his own house, with the 
name of Bishop Warburton upon the title-page, as the author. 
An offence so worthy of universal reprobation, would have 
drawn down upon its perpetrator the universal condemnation 
of society, had not the ministry, in a spirit of blundering ma¬ 
lignity, converted it into a source of triumph to their opponent. 
In the first instance, they had recourse to the most unworthy 





















JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


251 


artifices to procure a copy of the book; and it was manifest, 
that admitting the real authorship to be fully proved, the 
matter was one purely for the consideration of the courts of 
law that it was right to institute a prosecution, no one 
sought to deny—that the privileges of the peace had been 
violated by the unwarrantable use of the name of one of their 
body, was equally true—but the mode of proceeding which 
seemed to exhibit a desire on the part of the men in power to 
abolish, as much as possible, the authority of the competent 
tribunals, by substituting for legal formularies the arbitrary 
decisions of a factious assembly, naturally caused great alarm in 
the minds of the public; and the opposition which the motion of 
the Earl of Sandwich met with from a small section of the peers, 
was warmly seconded outside the walls of the two Houses. It 
is needless to add, that the motion, which was, that an address 
might be presented to the King, praying him to institute a 
prosecution against Mr. Wilkes, was carried by a large majority. 

In February, 1764, a motion was made in the House of Com¬ 
mons by Sir William Meredith, “ that a general warrant for 
apprehending and seizing the authors, printers, and publishers 
of a seditious libel, is not warranted by law.” The ministers 
found themselves extremely embarrassed by the plausibility and 
popularity of this motion ; they urged, in reply, that it was not 
consistent with the dignity of the House to pass a resolution 
respecting a point of law, which resolution, though it should be 
carried, would not, therefore, be law. And if the courts of law 
should, in the causes actually depending, be influenced by this 
restriction, and the House of Lords, in their judicial capacity, 
should decree the legality of general warrants, the consequences 
would be very disagreeable. They acknowledged that the 
power in question, though sanctioned by usage, was very liable 
to abuse, but they maintained the remedy should be provided 
by an Act of Parliament, passed upon cool deliberation, distin¬ 
guishing cases, and giving large discretionary powers to the 
Secretary of State, to meet the exigencies of the Government. 
But the opposition insisted that the practice in question was an 























252 


JOnN WILKES, ESQ. 


abuse, and they would never consent to any act for regulating 
that abuse. The debate being adjourned to the 17th, certain 
modifications to the original proposition were offered by the 
ministry, calculated to lessen the odium attending the practice, 
specifying the usage of office, and the tacit assent and approba¬ 
tion of the highest legal jurisdiction. This was rejected: and so 
strong had the public opinion been expressed upon the subject, 
that they did not dare to incur the odium of meeting the motion 
with a direct negative, but fell back upon a middle course, that 
of adjourning the question for four months. Mr. Pitt again 
stood forward to contend for the total abolition of the system. 
It was no justification, he said, that general warrants could plead 
the authority of precedent; two, he admitted, had been signed by 
himself, but they were not against libels ; they were issued in 
a time of war and public danger against persons believed to be 
in the interests of the enemy. Sensible of the irregularity of 
the act, but prefering the public safety to every personal consi¬ 
deration, he ran the risk, as he would of his head, relying upon 
the exigencies of the times and the necessity of the measure for 
his vindication. In the present case no such necessity existed; 
the charge was writing and publishing a libel. What was there 
in this crime so heinous and terrible as to require the use of this 
formidable engine, which, like an inundation, bore down all the 
barriers of the public safety ? It was plainly the indulgence 
of a violent resentment, pointed against a particular person. 
Surely Parliament could not see the extent of the surrender they 
had made. A vote had been passed, by which the personal 
freedom of every man in the kingdom was now at the mercy of 
His Majesty’s Attorney-General. Rising then into tones of the 
most sublime eloquence, Mr. Pitt pointed out how the constitu¬ 
tion watched over the safety of the meanest individual. It is a 
maxim of our law, he said, that every Englishman’s house is his 
castle. Not that it is surrounded with walls and battlements— 
it may be a straw built shed. Every wind of heaven may 
whistle through it,—but the King cannot—the King dare not 
enter it.” All the eloquence of the great orator was, however, 


















JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


253 


ineffectual for the time; it was reserved for another administra¬ 
tion to declare that general warrants were illegal, and that the 
ordinary forms of law were sufficient to meet all the exigencies 
of Government. The'praise of having destroyed this formidable 
engine of oppression is, however, justly due to Wilkes. 

Whilst the ministry were celebrating their dubious triumph, 
Wilkes was engaged in a tour upon the continent, whence his 
fame had preceded him; and the easy audacity which formed, as 
it were, the staple of his character, enabled him to figure with 
distinction at the court of France, at that time the most des¬ 
potic, perhaps, in existence. But the vices of a demagogue are 
always purely national, and the favourites of the Grand Mo- 
narque saw, in the reformer of all irresponsible authority, only 
the enemy of the English ministry. It was, therefore, quite in 
keeping with the ordinary character of things, that Madam 
Pornapadeur observed, you Englishmen are fine fellows ; “ how 
far may a man go in abuse of the royal family amongst you?” 
“ I do not quite know,” was the answer of Wilkes, “ but I am 
trying.” 

The correspondence of Diderot, and the approbation of 
Voltaire, were advantages not to be despised by one who was 
greedily covetous of notoriety ; but the exiled champion of 
liberty found that the most finely-turned compliments could not 
atone for the want of cash. Time rolled on, and found the 
people ungrateful, and the ministry still unrelenting. The 
sentence of outlawry was an obstacle which must be removed 
before any steps could be taken in the improvement of his 
prospects at home ; and as an earnest of his desire to atone for 
past transgressions, he addressed a letter of submission to the 
King, from Paris, having previously made overtures of peace 
to the existing administration. The like fate attended each 
attempt at negotiation. With unpardonable ignorance of their 
real interests, the government disdained to listen to his appeal, 
when by a single act they might have silenced him for ever ; 
and now reduced to desperation, the daring spirit of the man 
determined to brave all hazards in the prosecution of its pur- 



























254 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


pose. The general election of 1770 occurred, and to the aston¬ 
ishment of ministers, the broken outlaw made his appearance 
in the metropolis, a candidate for the representation of the city. 
He had nothing to depend upon but the sympathy of the people; 
but the result proved that his confidence in the extent of that 
power was not exaggerated. Six others competed with him for 
the honour, and the close of the contest found him in a very re¬ 
spectable minority of votes. This partial discouragement served 
only to raise his own hopes, and kindle still higher the popular 
fervour. The nomination for the county of Middlesex took place 
a few days later, and Wilkes again declared himself a candidate 
for the suffrages of the electors. The feeling in his favour now 
amounted almost to a species of national insanity. On both 
sides the contest was looked upon as a trial of strength between 
the court and the people ; and despite the utmost exertions of 
the former, his election was carried by a vast majority. His 
return was celebrated with the wildest demonstrations of joy. 
Perhaps the true secret of his wonderful success is to be found 
in the winning address of his conversation which seems to have 
been superior to that of any man of his time. No proof more 
convincing of the extent of his powers can be adduced, than the 
testimony afforded by Boswell, the celebrated biographer of 
Dr. Johnson, who, having met Wilkes in society, was eagerly 
anxious for his introduction to the great advocate of ministerial 
policy. The account furnished by Boswell of the first inter¬ 
view between men so strangely opposite in their nature and 
modes of thought, discloses much of the inner life of these 
singular men. Boswell has exercised much diplomatic skill in 
arranging the meeting without the knowledge of Johnson, and 
is somewhat dubious of the result. 

When we entered Mr. Dilly’s drawing-room, he found him¬ 
self in the midst of a company he did not know. I kept myself 
snug and silent, watching how he would conduct himself. I 
observed him whispering to Mr. Dilly, “Who is that gentleman, 
Sir?” “Mr. Arthur Lee.” Mr. Johnson: “Tut, tut, tut,” 
(under his breath), which was one of his habitual mutterings. 







JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


255 


Mr. Arthur Lee could not but be very obnoxious to Johnson, 
for be was not only a 'patriot , but an American. He was after¬ 
wards minister from the United States at the Court of Madrid. 
“ And who is the gentleman in lace?” “ Mr. Wilkes, Sir.” 
This information confounded him still more; he had some diffi¬ 
culty to restrain himself; and taking up a book, sat down upon 
a window-seat, and read, or at least, kept his eye upon it in¬ 
tently for some time, till he composed himself. His feelings 
I dare say, were awkward enough. But he no doubt recol¬ 
lected his having rated me, for supposing that he could be at all 
disconcerted by any company, and he therefore set himself to 
behave quite as an easy man of the world, who could adapt 
himself at once to the disposition and manners of those whom 
he might chance to meet. 

The cheering sound of “ Dinner is upon the table,” dissolved 
his reverie, and we all sat down without any symptom of ill 
humour. There were present, beside Mr. Wilkes and Mr. 
Arthur Lee, who was an old companion of mine, when he 
studied physic, at Edinburgh, Mr. (now Sir John) Miller, Dr. 
Lettsom, and Mr. Slater the druggist, Mr. Wilkes placed him¬ 
self next to Dr. Johnson, and behaved to him with so much 
attention and politeness, that he gained upon him insensibly. 
No man ate more heartily than Johnson, or loved better what 
was nice and delicate. Mr. Wilkes was very assiduous in help¬ 
ing him to some fine veal. “ Pray give me leave, Sir ;—It is 
better here,—a little of the brown,—some fat, Sir,—a little of 
the stuffing,—some gravy,—let me have the pleasure of giving 
you some butter,—allow me to recommend a squeeze of this 
orange—or the lemon, perhaps, may have more zest.” “ Sir, 
Sir, I am obliged to you, Sir;” cried Johnson, bowing, and 
turning his head to him with a look for some time of “ surly 
virtue,” but, in a short while, of complacenc. 

A modern writer commenting upon Walpole’s memoirs of 
the reign of George III, draws a picture of the ministry 
existing at that period, in colours which give us no favourable 
notion of the morality of their characters as individuals, or the 
































256 JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 

value of their combined talents as statesmen. All the blunders 
of that most disastrous struggle, the American war, may directly 
be traced to the conduct of the oligarchy. Too much accustomed 
to regard government as a natural appendage to their birth, 
they utterly forgot the true element of national power—the force 
of public opinion. Inflated with a sense of their personal supe¬ 
riority, they looked with easy indifference, or studied contempt, 
on every thing that was said or done by men whose genealogy 
was not registered in the red book. Of America—a nation of 
Englishmen and its proceedings, they talked as a Russian lord 
might talk of his serfs. Some of them thought that a stamp 
act might frighten the sturdy freeholders of the weslern world 
into submission ! Others prescribed a regimen of writs and 
constables, evidently regarding the American farmers as they 
regarded the poachers and paupers on their own demesnes. All 
this arose from stupendous ignornace ; but it was ignorance 
engendered by pride, and the exclusiveness of rank, and by the 
arrogance of caste; so excessive was this exclusiveness, that 
Burke, though the most extraordinary man of his time, and one 
of the most memorable of any time, could never obtain a seat 
in the cabinet, where such triflers as Newcastle, such shallow 
intriguers as the Bedfords, such figures of patrician pedantry as 
Buckingham, and such notorious characters as the Sandwiches, 
played with power like children with the cups and balls of their 
nursery. Lord North, with all his wit, his industry, and his 
eloquence, owed his admission into the cabinet to his being the 
son of the Earl of Guildford. Charles Fox, though formed by 
nature from his first entrance into public life, for the highest 
eminence of the senate, would never have been received into 
the government class, but for his casual connexion with the 
house of Richmond : thus they knew nothing of the real powers 
of the infinite multitude, which, however below the peerage, 
forms the country. They thought that a few proclamations 
from Downing Street could extinguish the resistance of millions 
three thousand miles off, with muskets in their hands, inflamed 
by a sense of wrong, and insensible to the gatherings of a 





























JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


257 


parliamentary coterie, and utterly unmindful of the powers of 
a minister. 

This haughty exclusiveness equally accounts for the contests 
with M ilkes. They felt themselves affronted much more than 
resisted. They were much more stung by the defiance of 'a 
piivate individual to themselves, than urged to collision by any 
sense of danger to the monarchy. No man out of Bedlam could 
conceive that Vv ilkes had either the power or the intention to 
subvert the state. But Mr. Wilkes, an obscure man, whose name 
was not known to the calendar of the government fabricators, 
had actually dared to call their power into question ; had defied 
them in the courts of law; had rebuked them in the senate ; had 
shaken their influence in the elections; and had, in fact, com¬ 
pelled them to know what they were so reluctant to learn, that 
they were but human beings after all. The acquisition of this 
knowledge cost them half a dozen years of convulsion, the most 
ruinous to themselves, and the most hazardous to the constitution. 
Wilkes’ profligacy had, perhaps, saved the constitution from a 
shock which might have changed the whole system of the empire. 
If he had not been sunk by his personal character, at the first 
moment when the populace grew cool, he might have availed 
himself of the temper of the times to commit mischief the most 
irreparable. If his personal character had been as free from 
public offence as his spirit was daring, he might have led the 
people much farther than the government ever had the foresight 
to contemplate. The conduct of the successive cabinets had 
covered the king with unpopularity, not the less fierce, that it 
was partly undeserved. Junius, the ablest political writer that 
England has ever seen, or probably ever will see, had pilloried 
every leading man, except Chatham, in the imperishable virulence 
of his pages. The popular mind was furious with indignation at 
the conduct of all cabinets, in despair of all improvements in 
the system, irritated by the rash severity which was attended 
with the equally rash pusillanimity of ministers, and beginning to 
regard government less as a protection than as an encroachment 
on the natural privileges of a nation of free men. 


Y 





































258 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


The most singular carelessness was exhibited by the govern¬ 
ment on the eve of the Middlesex election; a carelessness 
obviously arising from the contempt which the higher ranks of 
the nobility in those days were weak enough to feel for the 
opinions of those below them. On the very verge of an election, 
within five miles of London, and which must bring to a point all 
the exasperation of years, Camden, the chancellor, went down 
to Bath, and the Duke of Grafton, the prime minister, who was 
a great horse-racer, drove off to Newmarket. Lord Mansfield, 
at once resentful, timorous, and subtle, the three worst qualities 
of the heart, the nerves, and the understanding, pretended that 
it was the office of the chancellor to bring the outlaw (Wilkes) 
to justice, and did nothing. The consequence was, that the 
multitude were left masters of the field. 

On the morning of the election, while the irresolution of the 
court, and the negligence of the prime minister, caused a neglect 
of all precautions, the populace took possession of all the turn¬ 
pikes and avenues leading to the hustings, by break of day; 
and would suffer no man to pass who did not wear in his hat a 
blue cockade, with “ Wilkes and No. 45,” on a written paper. 
Riots took place in the streets, and the carriage of Sir Yvhlliam 
Procter, -the opposing candidate, was demolished. The first 
day’s poll for Wilkes was 1200; for Procter, 700; for Cooke, 
300. It must be remembered, that in these times the elections 
were capable of being prolonged from week to week, and that 
the first day was regarded as little more than a formality. At 
night the West-end was in an uproar. It was not safe to pass 
tin ough Piccadilly. Every house was compelled to illuminated 

the windows ; all which did not exhibit lights were broken. 

» _ 

The coach glasses of such as did not huzza for “ Wilkes and 
liberty,” were broken, and the panels of the carriage were 
scratched with 45. Lord Weymouth, Secretary of State, wrote 
to »justice Fielding for constables. Fielding answered, that they 
were all gone to Brentford. At this the guards were drawn out. 
The mob then attacked Lord Bute’s house, and Lord Egmont’s; 
but without being able to force an entrance. They compelled the 










259 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 

Duke of Northumberland to give them liquor to drink Wilkes’ 
health. Ladies ot rank were taken from their sedan-chairs, and 
ordered to join the popular cry. The Lord Mayor was an anti- 
M ilkite. The mob attacked the mansion-house, and broke the 
windows. He ordered out the train bands ; they had no effect. 
Six thousand weavers had risen under the Wilkite banner, and 
defied all resistance. Even some of the regimental drummers 
beat their drums for Wilkes. His force at the election was 
evidently to be resisted no longer. The ministerial candidate 
was beaten. Wilkes threw in his remaining votes for Cooke, and 
they came in together. The election was over on the second 
day, but the mob paraded the metropolis at night, insisting on a 
general illumination. The Duchess of Hamilton was determined 
not to comply. The result was, that the mob grew outrageous; 
broke down the outward gates with iron crows ; tore up the 
pavement of the street; and battered the doors and windows 
for three hours ; fortunately, without being able to get in. 

Count De Solliar, the Austrian ambassador, one of the most 
stately and ceremonious of men, was taken out of his coach by 
the laughing mob, who chalked 45 on the side of his hat. He 
made a formal and bitter complaint upon the subject; but the 
ministers were unable to give him any redress for the insult. 

Scarcely had the shouts, which hailed his victory at the hust¬ 
ings died away, than he was compelled to make his appearance 
in the court of King’s Bench, to the jurisdiction of which he 
had voluntarily submitted, and where the case was fully argued 
in the presence of an excited multitude. 

Bitter, indeed, must have been the hatred of the ministry, 
when the under Secretary of State was heard to declare, that if 
the king should grant Wilkes his pardon, Lord Weymouth 
would refuse to sign it. But an absolute surrender of their 
right to exalt him into a popular deity, would have been, for 
Wilkes, the most unfortunate of all results. Their folly was 
his salvation : it was necessary that they should become 
contemptible before he could hope to be made truly great. It 
was not really necessary that the country should be preserved, 



























260 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


bat it had become to him a matter of most pressing necessity to 
pursue the means of existence. And the government took all 
imaginable powers to secure the accomplishment of his wishes. 
His outlawry was reversed ; and a fine of £1000 inflicted, 
together with a sentence of twenty-two months’ imprisonment 
in the King’s Bench prison. This severity inflamed still more 
the passions of the people. They displayed, in the most 
emphatic manner, their hatred of the ministry, by the substantial 
marks of approbation which they bestowed upon the victim- 
conqueror! All ranks vied in expressions of attachment. Up¬ 
wards of £20,000 were subscribed to form a fund for the 
composition of his debt and his future maintenance. Tradesmen 
offered gifts of their choicest ware, and ladies contributed their 
ornaments to deck the living shrine of liberty. To quote the 
language of a contemporary writer, 44 Until the time of his first 
election for Middlesex, in March, 1768, through the whole of 
the year 1769, and even far into 1772 (a long reign for a 
people’s favourite), he was the sole unrivalled political idol of 
the people, who lavished upon him all in their, power to bestow, 
as if willing to prove, that in England it was possible for an indi¬ 
vidual to be great and important. Through them alone a sub¬ 
scription was opened for the payment of his debts, and £20,000 
was said to have been raised for the purpose, and for the dis¬ 
charging his fine. The Society for the support of the 4 Bill of 
Bights,’ presented him with £300. Gifts of plate, of wine, of 
household goods, were daily heaped upon him. An unknown 
patriot conveyed to him, in a handsomely embroidered purse, 
five hundred guineas. A honest chandler enriched him with 
a box, containing, of candles, the magic number of dozens (45). 
High and low contended with each other who should most 
serve and celebrate him. Devices and emblems of all des¬ 
criptions ornamented the trinkets conveyed to his prison ; the 
most usual was the cap of liberty, placed over his crest: upon 
others was a bird with expanded wings, hovering over a cage 
beneath: a motto — 4 I love liberty.’ Every wall bore his 
name, and every windoAv his portrait. In china, in bronze, or 






















JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


261 


in marble, he stood upon the chimney-pieces of half the houses 
in the metropolis ; he swung upon the sign-post of every 
village, of every great road throughout the country. He was 
accustomed himself to tell, with much glee, of a monarchical 
old lady, -behind whom he accidentally walked, looking up. 
She murmured within his hearing in much spleen, 4 lie swings 
everywhere, but where he ought.’ He passed her, and turned 
gracefully round; but the voice of disapprobation was of one in 
two thousands. The king was known to be averse to him; a 
feeling so well understood at court, that the Prince of Wales, 
then a mere child, having been corrected for some fault, put 
his head into the royal apartment, and shouted out, as the most 
effectual way of annoying his parent—Wilkes and 45 for ever !’ ” 
But there was not wanting those who felt how much the 
authority, both of the crown and ministry, was weakened by 
the prosecution of Wilkes; and a negotiation was therefore 
opened with him, the government offering a free pardon on the 
condition of his abstaining from attendance in his place as 
member for Middlesex, and thereby avoiding the necessity for 
their defence of the administration. This he declined to pro¬ 
mise, and all hopes of an accommodation were ended. The 
multitude assembled round the King’s Bench Prison on the day 
that parliament was opened, expecting to see him come forth 
and take his seat in the house. The magistrates wanted no 
incitement to do their duty; the military were sent for, and the 
mob not dispersing on the instant, they fired, killed one man, 
who, it is said, took no part in the uproar, and wounded 
several others. Here was a new source of public hatred. Lord 
Weymouth, the Secretary of State, addressed a letter to the 
magistrates, thanking them for their conduct on the occasion; 
and the Secretary at War wrote a similar epistle, thanking, in 
the name of the king, the soldiers for the use which they 
made of their weapons. These letters were transmitted by 
Wilkes to the newspapers, with comments, in which he termed 
the dispersion of the crowd a massacre. The House of Com¬ 
mons, true to its general character, inquired into the transac- 


























262 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


tion ; and having ascertained, from the avowal of Wilkes, that 
he was the author of the remarks, they voted them libellous, 
and expelled him from his seat in the house. It was now 
thought that an effectual blow had been dealt him; but the 
mistake was soon made palpable. He was again put in nomi¬ 
nation, and again chosen, without opposition ; and, with equal 
pertinacity, a second time expelled. The contest was now 
between parliament and the country ; and neither were inclined 
to shrink from pushing it to the utmost. Wilkes came to the 
poll again ; and, although a ministerialist offered himself, not 
a soul was found willing to put him in nomination. Again the 
election was declared void : and a Colonel Luttrell was per¬ 
suaded to offer himself as a candidate, with the express under¬ 
standing, on the part of the ministry, that he should be the 
sitting member, even though he polled*only a dozen votes. 
The greatest exertions were made by the government to secure 
the return of their candidate; but the fourth battle terminated 
in the final triumph of Wilkes, by 1143 to 296 votes, which were 
polled for his opponent. True to the pledge of their leader, 
the house declared Wilkes incapable of being re-elected, and 
seated Mr. Luttrell as the duly chosen representative of the 
county. 

To detail the events which arose out of this question, would 
be to relate the ywhole political history of the period, for the 
conduct of the ministry upon the Middlesex election was the 
theme of constant and effective attack by the opposition. The 
former, however, held their ground, and, during the continuance 
of the parliament, Wilkes was not idle. Another victory less 
signal, but more important, was reserved for him. The 
necessity for reporting the debates in parliaments had become a 
national one ; since the chief business of the empire was 
transacted in the house of commons : but no recognition of the 
principle had followed the tacit acknowledgment of the right of 
the people to be acquainted with the mode in which their repre¬ 
sentatives had discharged the duties entrusted to them. On the 
contrary, every obstacle was thrown in the way of those who 

















JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


263 


undertook to give tlie public intelligence, in a systematic manner, 
of the result of parliamentary meetings; and hence, although 
the anxiety of the leading politicians to have their conduct 
placed before the public in the truest or most favourable light, 
frequently involved them in the most startling contradictions: 
the debates of either assembly were only reported by stealth. 
Fictitious names were usually given to the various speakers, or, 
at best, their initials were prefixed to their supposed speeches. 
Imperfect notes only were furnished, except on rare occasions, 
or when the orator chose to send a copy of his speech to the 
printer ; and to all practical purposes the country was ignorant 
of nearly all, except the results of the voting. The finest 
specimen of what is termed the parliamentary eloquence of the 
fifteenth century owes in reality but little to the skill of the 
reporter, the speeches being either made up for the market by 
struggling authors, such as the youthful Johnson, or temporarily 
preserved from oblivion by the speakers themselves. This state 
of things was felt to be an evil which had grown too great for 
endurance ; but, with their usual want of foresight, the majo¬ 
rity of the house determined to increase it; and, accordingly, a 
messenger was sent with a warrant from the speakers into the 
city to arrest a printer who had dared to publish the debates in 
a form more than usually copious. The printer, however, 
refused to obey the authority of the messenger, and sent for 
a constable who carried them both before the Lord Mayor, 
Crosby, who, with Alderman Oliver, happened with Wilkes to be 
sitting at the time at Guildhall. It needed no argument on the 
part of the persecuted printer, to induce Wilkes to declare the 
arrest illegal; and for once he found a colleague to his mind. 
The prisoner was dismissed, and the messenger of the house 
threatened with a committal to gaol, unless he found bail to 
answer the charge of having taken a citizen in custody, without 
lawful authority. It may readily be supposed, that the Com¬ 
mons received intelligence of this open contempt of their sup¬ 
posed privileges with stern indignation. The Lord Mayor and 
Alderman Oliver were summoned to the bar of the House, and, 




















264 


JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


refusing to make any submission, were sent to the Tower, 
where they remained to the end of the session.* Wilkes, 
too, Avas ordered to attend, but he defied their power, and 
refused to enter the House, except in his capacity of member for 
Middlesex. This was a fatal blow to the dignity of the parlia¬ 
ment. The wounds recently inflicted, upon the point of irre¬ 
sponsible power, had not healed up ; and, in this new contest, 
he would again have the people on his side. Besides, this time 
the quarrel was not his own ; it had been forced on him in the 
discharge of his duty, as a magistrate, and, in such a contest, it 
was easy to foretell who would be the victor. Weighing all 
these considerations, the House wisely determined, that of the 
tAvo evils, it would be better to incur the risk of being con¬ 
temptible, than to run the danger of being proved impotent. 


* Thomas Allen, in his “ History of London,” states, “ The conduct of 
these magistrates, on this occasion, was so highly approved by the citizens, 
that a vote of thanks to them was passed in the Court of Common Council? 
and a committee was appointed to assist them in their defence; and, after 
their committal, they were brought before every court of judicature at 
Westminster, by Habeas Corpus, at the city expense, in order to procure 
their enlargement; but the courts refused to interfere with the privileges of 
the House of Commons ; and they were remanded to the Tower. 

At length, the day arrived, when, by the prorogation of parliament, the 
power that detained them expired, and their liberation Avas the consequence. 
Some days previous to it, the Court of Common Council had resolved to 
attend their enlargement, accompanied by ‘the city officers.. Accordingly, 
they assembled at Guildhall, and proceeded to the Tower in fifty-three 
carriages ; the procession being augmented by the Artillery Company, who 
attended in their uniform. When the Lord Mayor and Mr. Oliver were 
brought to the Tower-gate, they were saluted by twenty one pieces of can¬ 
non belonging to the Artillery Company, and from thence to the Mansion- 
house, received the loudest acclamations of an innumerable concourse of 
spectators. 

A common-hall was held, as usual, on Midsummer-day, for the election 
of city officers for the year ensuing ; when another motion w^as made and 
carried, “ That the Livery of London do desire the Common Council to pre¬ 
sent a silver cup to the right honourable the Lord Mayor, of the value of 
two hundred pounds, with the city arms engraved thereon ; and to the 
aldermen Wilkes and Oliver, one each, of the value of one hundred pounds, 
as marks of their gratitude for their upright conduct in the affairs of the 
printers, and for supporting the city charters.” 






















JOHN WILKES, ESQ. 


265 


It was therefore resolved, that Alderman Wilkes should be 
ordered to attend at the bar on the 8th of April, 1771, and that 
the House should adjourn until the day following. Thus, an 
expedient, which only involved the loss of public respect, 
avoided the consequences of an unpopular struggle. 

In the beginning of the year 1776, Sir Stephen Theodore 
Jansen resigned his situation as chamberlain of the city ; the 
vacant office was strongly contested between Alderman Benja¬ 
min Hopkins and Wilkes ; but the election was determined in 
favour of the former: after whose decease, in 1779, Mr. Wilkes 
was elected without opposition, and held the office till the time 
of his death. 























SIR WILLIAM FITZWILLIAM. 

(alderman.) 


If ever a kind and true-hearted man existed on the face of this 
“ mundane sphere,” it was certainly Sir William Fitzwilliam, 
who, in the year 1510, was alderman of Bread-street ward. 
There are few incidents of his life furnished to us hy history ; 
but these incidents, trivial as they ?.re, afford us a better insight 
into the real character of the man, than if folio volumes had 
been written of the splendours of his public life. It has been 
well said, that the small vestiges which remain at the present 
moment to denote the domestic life of Egypt in her primeval 
glory, afford a better evidence of the actual amount of civiliza¬ 
tion she once enjoyed, than all her splendid pyramids and 
mausoleums; because the former are the evidences of the actual 
condition of the once living multitudes, and the latter are only 
the vestiges of a splendid despotism. And, in like manner, 
looking at the actual condition of an individual mind, as fur¬ 
nished to us by history, we obtain a far deeper insight into 
the real character of the man by those little incidents which 
tell of his affections and feelings, than by all the acts, how¬ 
ever pompous and elaborate, of his public life. One act 
alone of SirWm. Fitzwilliam’s towards his former friend and 
patron, the celebrated Cardinal Wolsey, will insure him a 
meed of sympathy and praise from every right-minded indivi¬ 
dual. In the year 1510, this worthy knight Avas disfranchised 
from his civic rights, in consequence of his refusal to serve the 










SIR WILLIAM FITZWILLIAM. 


267 


office of sheriff. He does not appear to have repined very 
much at this deprivation, for he retired to his estate at Milton 
in Northamptonshire. It was here, when the great cardinal 
fell under the displeasure of his master, king Henry VIII., 
that Wolsey in his journey directed his footsteps; and the 
manner in which he was received by Sir William is thus told 
in George Cavendish’s Life of the Cardinal. Cavendish was 
u gentleman usher” to Wolsey, and the account which we tran¬ 
scribe in his own words, is the more interesting, because it 
furnishes us with the circumstances under which Sir William 
and the Cardinal first became acquainted with each other. 

“ My lord continuing at Peterborough after this manner, 
intending to remove from thence, sent me to Sir William Fitz- 
william, a knight, which dwelt within three or four miles of 
Peterborough, to provide him there a lodging until Monday 
next following, on his journey northward. And being with 
him, to whom I declared my lord’s request, and he being thereof 
very glad, rejoiced not a little that it would please my lord to 
visit his house in his way, saying, that he should be most 
lieartiliest welcome of any man alive, the king’s majesty ex¬ 
cepted ; and that he should not need to discharge the carriage 
of any of his staff for his own use during the time of his being 
there ; but have all things furnished ready against his coming 
to occupy, his own bed excepted. Thus, upon my report made 
to my lord at my return, he rejoiced of my message, command¬ 
ing me therein to give warning to all his officers and servants to 
prepare themselves to remove from Peterborough upon Thurs¬ 
day next. Then every man made all things in such readiness 
as was convenient, paying in the town for all things as they had 
taken of any person for their own use, for which cause my lord 
caused a proclamation to be made in the town, ‘ That if any 
person or persons in the town or country, were offended or 
grieved against any of my lord’s servants, that they should 
resort to my lord’s officers, of whom they should have redress, 
and truly answered as the case justly required.’ So that, all 
things being furnished, my lord took his journey from Peter- 










26 8 


SIR WILLIAM FITZWILLIAM. 


borough* upon the Thursday in Easter week, to Master Fitz- 
william’s, where he was joyously received, and had right worthy 
and honourable entertainment at the only charge and expense 
of the said Master Fitzwilliam’s, all [the] tjpe of his being 
there.* 

“ The occasion that moved Master Fitzwilliam thus to rejoice 
of my lord’s being in his house was, that he sometime being a 
merchant of London and sheriff there, fell in debate with the 
city of London upon a grudge between the aldermen of the 
bench and him, upon a new corporation that he would erect 
of a new mystery, called, Merchant Taylor’s, contrary to the 
opinion of divers of the bench of aldermen of the city, which 
caused him to give and surrender his cloak, and departed from 
London, and inhabited within the country : and against the 
malice of all the said aldermen and other rulers in the common¬ 
weal of the city, my lord defended him, and retained him in his 
service, -whom he made first his treasurer of his house, and then 
after his high chamberlain ; and, in conclusion, for his wisdom, 
gravity, port, and eloquence, being a gentleman of a comely 
stature, made him one of the king’s counsel; and [he] so con¬ 
tinued all his life afterward. Therefore, in consideration of all 
these gratitudes received at my lord’s hands, as well in his 
trouble as in his preferment, was most gladest like a faithful 
friend of good remembrance to requite him with the semblable 
gratuity and right joys, that he had any occasion to minister 
some pleasure, such as then lay in his power to do. 

“ Thus my lord continued there until the Monday next, where 
lacked no good cheer of costly viands, both of wine and other 
goodly entertainment; so that upon the said Monday my Lord 
departed from thence unto Stamford, where he lay all that 
night.” 

* In Mr. Ellis’s very interesting collection of Historical Letters, vol. i. p. 
176, there is an extract of a letter from Sir William Fitzwilliam, then on a 
mission in France, relating a conversation he had with the French king 
upon his hearing the Duke of Buckingham was in the Tower, with the 
Cardinal’s answer. 




SIR WILLIAM FITZWILLIAM. 


269 


“ Bluff ancl bloated Hal,” with characteristic inhumanity, 
summoned Sir Wm, Fitzwilliam before him for this act of 
friendship and humanity, and demanded, “ How he durst enter¬ 
tain so great an enemy of the state ? ” His answer was at 
once bold, and full of feeling: he said, “ That he had not con¬ 
temptuously or wilfully done it, but only because he (the Car¬ 
dinal) had been his master, and partly the means of his greatest 
fortunes.” It is reported, that the king was so pleased with 
this honest and feeling rejoinder, that he immediately knighted 
Wm. Fitzwilliam, and afterwards made him a privy counsellor, 
adding, “ that he himself had too few such servants.” There 
is some doubt, however, as to the truth of this latter part of 
the story, as we find Cavendish addressing him by the title of 
“knight,” when the circumstance transpired which gave rise to 
the interview with the king. It is certain, however, that he 
continued in high favour with the monarch ; for, at his death, 
in 1542, we find that he held the offices of Lord Keeper of the 
Privy Seal, and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster; and 
was a Knight of the Order of the Garter. A few of his cha¬ 
rities and bequests are mentioned, and they tend still further 
to illustrate the feeling character of his mind : 

He bequeathed f 100 for the marriage portions of poor 
maidens. 

He cancelled all the debts due to him, and forgave his 
debtors, writing over their names, Amove Dei remitto —for the 
love of God I remit. 

He gave to the Universities, £40; to mend certain highways 
and bridges in Essex, £100 ; and to the poor within four miles 
of his manor of Guildford, £100. 

To the Merchant Taylors’ (his own) Company, he bequeathed 
his best standing cup as a friendly remembrance of him for 
ever. 

To King Henry VIII. his great ship, with all her tackles, 
&c., and all his Collar of the Garter, with his best “ George,” 
beset with diamonds ; and to Sir Thomas Wrotherly, Chief 
Secretary of State, the best of his gilt cups. 


















270 


SIR WILLIAM FITZWILLIAM. 

To Mabel, the daughter of Sir Anthony Brown, his brother, 
for her advancement in marriage, the sum of £100 per annum. 

He also desired that his body might be buried in the church 
of Midhurst, Sussex, if he died within one hundred miles of it ; 
and wished his executors to build a new chapel, and a tomb 
therein for himself, and Mabel his wife. 

Such are the few traits that history has left us of this amia¬ 
ble man; and they lead us to regret that we do not know more 
of one whose virtues shone conspicuously amidst surrounding 
faithlessness and insincerity. 










THOS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGHAM 
AND JAMES BANCE. 

* 


(ALDERMEN.) 

From the period when Sir William Walworth subdued the 
popular leader, down to the time when all loyal hearts beat 
high with enthusiasm at the advent of Elizabeth to the throne 
of these realms, the constant policy maintained by the city 
had been that of blind and unflinching obedience to the crown. 
Whichever dynasty came uppermost in the great national “ toss 
up,” whether York was victor over Plantagenet, or Plantagenet 
triumphed over York, mattered not, the civil authorities were 
ever faithful to “the powers that ivere” Their sole duty seemed 
to be that of obedience, and the exercise of homage and adulation 
their only aim. The rebel of to-day might become the monarch 
of to-morrow, and the royal forces might be scattered to the 
winds of heaven; but the city was still steadfast in its obedience, 
not to the man, but to the crown—to the throne, and not to him 
that sat thereon. It would demand more space than can be 
allotted to such a question, in the present work, to investigate 
the causes of this blind obedience, or to analyse the motives 
that led to it; and it would involve us in a still more length¬ 
ened dissertation, were we to pronounce an opinion upon the 
honesty or dishonesty, the propriety or impropriety, of such a 
course. It is sufficient, at present to observe, that the crown, 
or rather its ministers, abused this obsequious loyalty in every 







272 THOS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGHAM, AND JAMES BANCE. 

possible way ; and, at no period, perhaps, to a greater extent, 
than in the reign of Elizabeth. Year after year, did the 
ministers renew their demands upon the civic exchequer, 
and each fresh act of compliance seemed only to whet their 
appetites for another, and yet another demand. Had the city 
been affected with the most fearful plethora of money, the art 
of venesection could not have been plied more vigorously than- 
it was by these state physicians. They seemed to regard the 
city as a large storehouse, to which, in any emergency, they 
might apply for monetary food. The good-natured vanity of 
the citizens fed this spirit to an enormous extent. Seldom 
did the monarch visit the city, but he or she departed like a 
well-entertained beggar, with a wallet laden with something 
more precious than “ broken meat.” Not an ambassador set 
his foot within its precincts, who did not depart, if not a wiser, 
at least, a richer man ; and state avarice being thus crammed 
with abundance of good things, like a well-fed dog, knew its 
own home, and in every necessity ran at once to the city. Not 
only were enormous loans demanded of them, but they were 
compelled to furnish vast armies out of the civic purse ; to man 
fleets, provide seamen and victual them, and to maintain these 
expensive armaments for a considerable space of time. These 
exorbitant demands increased with the readiness of the city 
to comply with them, until at length they became intolerable. 
Other acts of insolent demand followed, and the loyalty or 
temerity of the citizens yielded a ready compliance. 

But men had now fallen upon more spirit-stirring times : and 
the first man who had the temerity to oppose this rapacity, was 
Sir John Spenser; and, as this circumstance has been omitted 
in the life of that eminent man, we allude to it in the present 
article, as being the first dawning of that spirit of independence 
which was afterwards exhibited in a variety of other forms. 
Amongst other demands made by the officers of the crown, 
during Sir John Spenser’s mayoralty, was one by Sir John 
Hawkins, one of the Queen’s admirals, for the use of the Bridge- 
house, which was “ then the common granary of the city,” and 























THOS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGHAM, AND JAMES BANCE. 273 

which he intended to convert into a store-house and bakery for 
the use of the navy. This granary appears to have been of 
immense importance to the city at this period; and upon this 
demand being made, Sir John Spenser addressed a spirited 
letter to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, in which he sets forth, 
that the several companies of the city had been required to 
make provision, and “ furnish themselves with a supply of 
wheat and rye,” and that these arrangements were not in such 
a forward state as they ought to have been ; that the demand 
of Sir J. Hawkins would, if complied with, have furnished the 
city with a pretext for neglecting this provision, the more neces¬ 
sary, because, in time of dearth, the citizens were only furnished 
with their supplies from foreign parts; and he concludes by “re¬ 
minding the crown officers, that they had already ample room 
for their provision at Tower Hill, Whitehall, and Westminster: 
and also, if they would not serve, her Majesty had in her hands 
Winchester-house, wherein great quantities might be laid.” This 
refusal of Sir John to surrender the public granaries was, as 
might be supposed, highly offensive to the ministers of his day, 
accustomed, as they were, to receive an unqualified submission 
to all their demands ; but Sir John stood firm, and braved the 
tide of ministerial indignation—thus maintaining the rights of 
the city. 

There can be no doubt that this act of firmness, coupled with 
others exhibited by the same worthy, first awakened in the 
minds of the citizens feelings of independence; and, accordingly, 
at the period when the unfortunate Charles lost at once his 
kingdom and his life, we find the Lord Mayor, and some of the 
aldermen (though almost throughout the entire civil war they 
had sided with the Parliament) opposing the will of the legis¬ 
lature at the time when it was all powerful. 

Immediately after the execution of Charles I., the pailia- 
ment passed an act “ for the exheredation of the Royal line, the 
abolition of monarchy in the kingdom, and the setting up of a 
commonwealth.” This act was sent to the city for publication ; 
and Sir Abraham Reinardson, who was then (1649) Lord Mayor, 


a a 



















274 THOS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGHAM, AND JAMES BANCE. 

together with Aldermen Thomas Adams, John Langham, and 
James Bailee, refused to published it. For this olfence, Sir 
Abraham Reinardson was deprived of the honours of his civic 
office; and together with the aldermen, committed to the Tower. 
Of the further acts of the Lord Mayor we hear nothing 3 but 
we find the three aldermen, on the 8 th of April, summoned to 
appear before the bar of the House of Lords.. The stout-hearted 
citizens at once denied the power of that tribunal to interfere 
with their liberties, and declared their intention of appealing 

“to their proper and competent judges,” i. e., a jury of their 

• 

equals. Their letter, and the annexed petition, are so remark¬ 
able, both from the style in which they are written and the 
undaunted spirit which they exhibit, that we are induced to 
present them, without further comment, to the reader:— 

‘‘A Salva Libertate, sent to Colonel Tichburn, lieutenant of 
the Tower, on Sunday, April 23, by Thomas Adams, John 
Langham, and James Bance, Aldermen of London, now prison¬ 
ers in the .Tower ; being occasioned by the receipt of a paper 
sent unto them, by the said lieutenant; wherein the said lieu¬ 
tenant was seemingly authorized .to carry them before the Lords, 
on Tuesday, the 2oth of April. 

“ To our honoured friend , Colonel Tichburn, Lieutenant of 

the Tower . 

“ Sir,—-We received a letter from you, seeming to authorize 
you to carry our persons before the Lords, to answer to a charge. 
We are constrained to inform you hereby, that our persons ought 
not to be hurried to or fro, or disturbed at the pleasure of any 
man ; k neither can we yield obedience to the commands of any, 
which are not legal: And, therefore, in case you intend to 
disturb us on Tuesday next, we expect to see a legal warrant 
from some person or court, which have jurisdiction over us, in 
case of a real or supposed crime : And we must acquaint you 
that the Lords have no legal power to summon us to answer to 
any crime whereof we are accused or suspected; and therefore, 
you must expect to answer for whatsoever injury you offer to 

































TUGS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGHAM, AND JAMES DANCE. 275 

our persons : And know hereby, That we shall not voluntarily 
go from hence to Westminster, by virtue of the paper received, 
hut shall suffer you to carry us, if you shall send force which 
we cannot resist. 

“ Your friends and servants, 

“ Thomas Adams, 
“John Langham, 

“ James Bance. 

“ From our Chambers, in the Tower of London, April 23, 1648.” 


a Lo the Right Honourable, the Lords assembled in Parliament; 
the humble petition of Thomas Adams, John Langham, and 
James Bance, Aldermen of London, fyc. 

a Sheweth, 

“ That, if your petitioners shall submit to your Lordships’ 
jurisdiction over commoners in those criminal cases, or novel- 
isms in law, intitled, £ Articles of Impeachment of High Treason, 
and other Misdemeanours,’ they shall not only be feloes de se, but 
also shall murther the persons, and ruin the estates of all the 
freeborn people of England : And, that which is more, they 
shall betray the common law, which is the supreme authority 
(under God) of the nation, and the inheritance of every free¬ 
man’s posterity: And that which is worst of all, they shall be 
instrumental to pull down all the judicatories of the kingdom, 
and re-edify an arbitrary government, many stories higher than 

i 

even the Star Chamber, High Commission, or Council Table 
were : And by the same rule that your Lordships have fined 
several commoners £500 a man, for not kneeling, or submit¬ 
ting to your Lordships’ jurisdiction in criminal cases, for which 
there is no law; nay, which is absolutely and apparently against 
the fundamental laws of the land, and the ordinary rule of your 
own court of judicature; usually referring those eauses, which 
appertain to the common law, to the other courts of justice, 
especially if the people desire it; so you may fine their fellow- 
citizens and commoners of England, as many millions, and take 






























276 TIIOS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGHAM, AND JAMES BANCE. 

away the lives and estates of all, as well as some, to the perpe¬ 
tual destroying and enslaving the whole kingdom, by the 29th 
Chapter of the Great Charter, being a statute declaratory of 

the common law ; especially those common laws, wherein your 

% 

Lordships had your shares in making them ; viz. The Petition 
of Right, 3 Caroli, and the act for abolishing the Star Chamber 
and regulating the Council Table, in the 17th Caroli, in which 
many statutes are enumerated : That commoners ought to be 
tried by their equals, by bill of indictment, or writ original, 
and by those of their neighbourhood : And all decrees and 
judgments made contrary thereunto, are declared thereby to be 
null and void in law, which bars all precedents; and by several 
declarations and ordinances, your Lordships have declared, 
That ordinances are no 8 laws, but temporary during the wars; 
and the case of necessity being taken away, your Lordships 
have promised the free people of England that they shall be 
governed according to the known laws of the land, as it appears 
in the ordinance, dated the 15th of January, 1647 : And it is 
against the law of God, nature, and nations, that any person or 
persons, should be judge and parties, examiners or accusers, in 
their own cause, or to be tried otherwise than by a known law : 
‘For where there is no law, there is no transgression.’ It is 
declared by Sir Edward Coke, That the parliament cannot make 
a law against the law of nature, which is custom, according to 
right and necessary reason : That precedents are nothing in 
comparison of the common and statute laws; these being known 
maxims in law. 

“A facto ad Jus non valet Argumentum , Gubernandum est 
Legibus, non Exemplis: Articles are nothing in law, but mere 
innovations and prerogatives extra-judicial, especially when or¬ 
dinary persons are in question. The old maxim in law is, Non 
recurrendum est ad extraordinaria quando fieri potest per 
ordinaria. And your Lordships are not only sworn, but have 
imposed several oaths, as the protestation, and solemn league 
and covenant, upon the free Commoners of England, to defend 
the fundamental laws of the land; and they are confident your 
















THOS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGIIAM, AND JAMES BANCE. 277 

Lordships will be very tender of the preservation of the Great 
Charter, in which are wrapped up our lives, liberties, and 
estates, your noble predecessors being so*glorious and famous 
instruments in assisting this people in purchasing the same. 

“ Concerning the point of precedent, which is all that can be 
said for your Lordships, we shall give you the answer :— 

“ 1. It is observable, that all such commoners, which have 
submitted to your Lordships’ jurisdiction, were, in time of the 
civil wars, Flagrante Bello , not by compulsion, but by voluntary 
petitions of the commons, in a summary way, to the King in 
person. 

“ 2. One precedent against your Lordships’ jurisdiction is of 
more consequence than a thousand for it : The reason is plain; 
because all courts of judicature are bottomed upon the law of 
the land; and it cannot be supposed, that any court can be mis¬ 
cognizant of its own jurisdiction. Your Lordships have con¬ 
fessed in Sir Simon de Benisforde’s case, that it is against the 
law for peers to try commoners ; and 3 jour predecessors have 
promised, upon record, that they will never do like again, though 
that occasion were superlative, Rot. 2, Rot. Pari. 5, Numb. 45. 

“ 3. The Corporation of Cambridge was accused before the 
King and Lords, for complying with the rebels of Essex, Kent, 
and Hertford ; their council pleaded against the jurisdiction of 
the Lords’ House in the point of treason, and the King and 
Lords allowed the plea. 

“ 4. As there are many precedents, more may be alleged, that 
commoners have denied your Lordships’ jurisdiction ; and that 
your Lordships have transmitted such causes to the common 
law, if desired by the free people ; so there can be no precedent 
to be shown, that commoners, which have refused to be tried 
by your House, have been over-ruled by them in point of juris¬ 
diction. 

“ 5. There was never any precedent since there were Parlia¬ 
ments in England, that the same Sessions of Parliament hath 
imprisoned, fined, or any otherwise disseized or destroyed any 
man for obeying or executing the laws, ordinances, or orders 
































278 TJIOS. ADAMS, JOHN LANGHAM, AND JAMES DANCE. 

of the same Parliament. And there are many ordinances in 
force, which indemnify all those which have acted by the 
authority of Parliament, viz., May 26, 1642, P. Book, Deck P. 
281, June 14, 1642, P. 377. The premises considered, 

“ Your petitioners, being free commoners of England, accord¬ 
ing to the known laws of the land (de Jure), claim their birth¬ 
right, which is, to be tried by God and their country, in his 
Majesty’s court of justice, by the sworn judges of the law, and 
a jury of their equals of their own neighbourhood, where the 
pretended fact was done, the courts of justice being open. 

“ And your Petitioners shall pray.” 








GREGORY DE ROCKESBY, 


(mayor.) 

The claim of Gregory de Rockesby to rank amongst the more 
celebrated men that have presided over the city of London, 
rests upon a single incident ; but, as that event was an impor¬ 
tant one, and strongly exhibits the real character of the man, 
we see no good and sufficient reason why he should be deprived 
of a niche amongst those men of eminence whom history has 
handed down to us, as worthy of remembrance. In the year 
1284, one Laurence Ducket, a goldsmith, fell into a violent 
quarrel, common to that rude age, with Ralph Crepin. The 
rencontre took place in Cheapside, and Ducket having danger¬ 
ously wounded his adversary, and dreading the vengeance of 
the law, took “ sanctuary” in Bow Church steeple. It is, per¬ 
haps, needless to inform the reader, that in these early ages, 
certain religious edifices were set apart as sanctuaries, whither 
the criminal fled, and was considered safe from the avenger. 
The sanctuary, however, proved to be but a poor asylum 
for Ducket. The friends of Crepin stole into the church in the 
night, and having seized Ducket, hung him in one of the 
windows, in such a position, as to make it appear that the act 
had been one of his own. A coroner’s jury was accordingly im- 
pannelled, and a verdict of “ felo de se ” having been returned, 
the corpse was, according to custom, dragged from the church 
by the feet, and buried in a ditch outside the city walls. The 
























280 


. GREGORY DE ROCKESBY. 


popular idea, that “ murder will out,” was strongly exemplified 
in this case. It happened that a boy was in the church at the 
time of the murder, who concealed himself during the time the 
deed was perpetrated ; and having given information of the 
murder, a number of persons were apprehended, of whom six¬ 
teen were hung; and a woman who plotted the murder, in 
accordance with the cruel spirit of the age, was burnt alive ; 
several persons of distinction, who were involved in the trans¬ 
action, were fined in various sums of money. The body was 
exhumed and re-interred in a proper manner. The Monarch, 
Edward I., appears to have thought it proper, in consequence of 
this and similar acts of violence, to appoint a commission of 
inquiry: and accordingly, the Lord Treasurer summoned the 
Mayor, aldermen, and citizens of London, to wait upon him at 
the Tower, and to give some account in justification of these 
violent breaches of the peace. Gregory Rockesby was the 
Mayor at this time, 1285, (having been elected previously as 
alderman for the ward of Dowgate,) and as he considered this 
demand of the Lord Treasurer an invasion of the civic privi¬ 
leges, he refused to attend in his official capacity of Mayor; but 
having deposited his insignia of office in Barking church, and 
delivered the city seal to Stephen Aswy, alderman of the ward, 
he repaired to the Tower simply as a private individual. The 
Lord Treasurer was so deeply annoyed at this slight to his 
authority, that he committed Rockesby and several of the prin¬ 
cipal citizens to prison. When a report of these facts was made 
to the king, he approved of the conduct of his Lord Treasurer; 

• and, to show his displeasure, he discharged the Mayor from his 
office, deprived the city of its privileges, and vested the govern¬ 
ment in the hands of a custos, or keeper, in which it remained 
for some years, the city being for the next twelve years 
without a mayor. The ostensible reason for thus disgracing 
Rockesby, was a concocted charge that ‘he had taken bribes 
from the bakers, to allow them to defraud the public, “ by 
making their penny loaves six or seven ounces too light.” 

The sudden breaking up of any judicial arrangements must, 


















GREGORY DE ROCKESBY. 


281 


however, always be attended with inconvenience, and even 
danger. And so it proved in this instance. The abolition of 
the civic officers, who alone knew the secret machinery of crime 
within the city, and the means of its detection, opened at once 
the floodgates of violence. Robbers abounded in the streets, 
who committed many acts of violence, and even murders. As 
a natural consequence, stringent measures were adopted by 
the custos, under the sanction of the crown. No stranger was 
allowed to wear weapons, or to be seen in the streets after the 
ringing of the cover-feu (curfew) bell, in St. Martin’s-le-Grrand. 
Vintners were commanded to close their houses at the ringing 
of this bell, under penalties, ranging according to the number 
of offences, from 3s. 4c?. to 20s.; fencing-schools were prohi¬ 
bited, under a penalty of forty marks for every offence ; all the 
aldermen were to make a thorough search in their several 
wards for offenders ; and, as it Akas suspected that many of 
those atrocities-were committed by foreigners, no person who 
was not free of the city, was allowed to reside therein, and 
nearly eighty suspected persons were banished the city for life. 
Such were a few of the stringent laws consequent upon these 
atrocities—atrocities which may fairly be traced to the sudden 
extinction of the criminal regulations, and which continued, 
with more or less violence, till the restoration of the civic 
privileges, years afterwards. 
































SIR THOMAS WHITE. 

i 

(lord mayor). 

Amongst the various civic dignitaries who have, by their 
munificence in the cause of education, secured themselves an 
undying reputation, the name of Sir Thomas White deserves 
honourable mention. He was elected to the mayoralty in the 
year 1553. Amongst the memorials of his liberal benevolence, 
Grlo’ster Hall and St. John Baptist’s College, in the university 
of Oxford, are not the least remarkable. The circumstances 
which led to his founding the latter college are singular, and 
furnish us with an interesting example of the superstitious 
feeling which, in that age, governed the minds of even well- 
informed men. An impulse (an infatuation it might almost 
be called) led him to cherish the wish to establish a college 
“ at a place where two elm trees grewand having, no doubt, 
without much difficulty, discovered such a spot, he there caused 
that college to be erected, and endowed it in the most liberal 
manner. Nor did his zeal for learning end here : for schools 
at Bristol and Reading, and a college at Higham Ferrers, bear 
witness to the ample benevolence that stirred within him. 
His efforts to relieve the sufferings of his fellow-men, in a 
physical point of view, were equally conspicuous : and his ap¬ 
plication of the charities was founded on that close adherence 
to prudence, which renders them a model to any of the chari¬ 
table institutions of our own age. A gift of £2000 to the city of 
Bristol was laid out in the purchase of lands, and their yearly 


























SIR THOMAS WHITE. 


283 


rents amounted to £120; of this sum £100 was to be lent for 
the space of ten years, to four poor young men, being freemen 
and clothiers belonging to one of the principal cities of England. 
In the succeeding year,, the £100 was, in like manner, divided 
amongst a similar number of young men belonging to some 
other city, a regular order of succession being enjoined by the 
worthy donor. These were only parts of his extensive munifi¬ 
cence, which displayed itself in a variety of forms, and always 
with the same regard to the permanent welfare of its recipients. 

The chronicles of this period supply us with some curious 
examples of the progress of legislation, both as regards the 
imperial Parliament and that of the common council. An act 
was passed about this time, restricting the number of taverns 
within the city and liberty of London, to forty ; and those of 
Westminster to three. At that period, Sir John Barleycorn had 
not commenced a very vigorous reign—the common beverage 
appearing 'to be the various wines of France: and, by the same 
statute, the price of Gascoigne and French wines was fixed at 
8d. the gallon, and those of Rochelle at 4d., a price which com¬ 
pels us to smile at a remark made in later chronicles, that “then 
there were not the present duties on wine.” 

Another enactment, only made by the civic legislature, im¬ 
posed a penalty of £5 and imprisonment, in the event of non¬ 
payment, upon all citizens who should employ foreigners in any 
kind of business, except those of felt-making, carding, spinning, 
brewing, &c. This measure was called for by the circumstance 
of a great number of the mechanics of London being in a state 
of great distress, arising, perhaps, partly from the labour market 
being overstocked, but more particularly from the superior 
skill of foreign workmen, who at that period greatly excelled 
our own artisans in all kinds of mechanical employments. But 
a far better insight into the character of the citizens of that 
period is afforded to us in the reception given about this time 
to Joseph Eapia, an Ambassador Extraordinary from the Czar 
of Russia to the Court of England. This functionary had the 
misfortune to be shipwrecked on the coast of Scotland, an 


























284 


SIR THOMAS WHITE. 


event in which his life was exposed to imminent peril, his 
domestics and baggage being nearly all lost. The Russia 
Company, upon being apprized of this catastrophe, obtained 
letters from the court of St. James to that of Scotland, in order 
to insure a favourable reception to the ambassador. They also 
furnished him with money and all other necessaries for his 
journey to London. When he approached the city, eighty 
merchants richly apparelled, and on horseback, met him about 
twelve miles off, and with great pomp conducted him to the 
house of a merchant at Highgate, where he was presented with 
a large sum of money in gold, and various other costly gifts. 
The next morning he entered the city, attended by one hun¬ 
dred and forty Russia merchants, all attired in magnificent 
costumes, and followed by their servants, in beautiful liveries. 
Even at this remote period the citizens of London had gained 
for themselves the appellation of “ merchant princes.” 

And then followed an event that separated the last chain 
of territorial possession which England had so long held in 
France. War was declared with that nation, proclamation 
being duly made in the city by the King at Arms, accom¬ 
panied by the Lord Mayor, aldermen, and sheriffs ; and the 
city also advanced to the crown the sum of £20,000, at 12 per 
cent, interest, for the purpose of carrying on this war. The 
result of this war was, the loss of Calais, and the effect pro¬ 
duced upon the sovereign’s mind is attested by her well- 
known declaration, “that, when she died, Calais would be 
found engraven on her heart.” 






























SIR JOHN PHILPOT. 


(lord MAYOR.) 

It may, perhaps, be truly said, when we refer to the past 
condition of London as contrasted with the present, that the 
only thing that remains in it unchanged is its ancient and 
magnificent river. Time, with its unsparing ploughshare, has 
rooted up all the physical traces of its splendour, and left the 
recollection of them only in the pages of history. We look, in 
vain, for the relics of Baynard Castle, and the Tower Royal; 
and the thickly-peopled dwellings of London-bridge exist only 
in imagination. The ancient cavalcades that swept along the 
streets have passed away; likewise, we no longer behold a 
kingly retinue sweeping down Cheapside, where knights and 
barons, clad in impenetrable steel, mingled with the bold 
burghers of Cripplegate and Walbrook. These memorials have 
passed away, and it is well they have : the dazzling pomp of 
semi-barbaric power has melted down into the sober, more 
useful, and not less magnificent display of wealth, practically 
exhibited; the towers of feudalism that hovered over the city, 
have been razed, and on their site have sprung up vast ware¬ 
houses, docks, and railroad stations—the sure indications of 
prosperity and peace; and where the ancient bridge once stood, 
with its line of houses, and closely pent-up channels, causing 
the water to flow with torrent-like impetuosity between, now 
another and more stately structure exists, which offers no 



























286 


SIR JOHN FHILPOT. 


impediment to the free passage of the stream, or to that which 
floatetli thereon. 

And with these physical changes in our modern Babylon, a 
change equally remarkable has passed over the manners and 
spirit of the age; a change so marked, that hut few admirers 
of the good old times would like to exchange their present 
condition, as citizens, for that of the age of which we write. 
Broad swords and bucklers, rapiers and pistols, would sit 
uneasily on your present race of citizens. Whatever gusto 
our aldermen and common councilmen have to be “ the first at 
a feast,” they have no relish whatever to be forward in a fray; 
and the now harmless excursion to the Red House, or to 
Twickenham Ait, was then undertaken only for some fierce 
struggle, when rapier crossed rapier, and heavy drops of human 
gore fell on the sward beneath. No man exemplified the 
character of the citizen-kniglit better than Sir John Philpot, 
who was as stern a defender of the rights of the city in peace, 
as he was staunch in times of war. 

Towards the close of Edward the Third’s reign, the city 
and the court were not on the best terms with each other. 
A difference of rather serious character had broken out between 
Courtney, Bishop of London, and John, Duke of Lancaster. 
It appears, that the Duke of Lancaster, who was a warm 
friend and disciple of the celebrated reformer, Wickliffe, 
together with Lord Piercey, Marshal of England, attended 
Wickliffe to St. Paul’s Church, whither he had been sum¬ 
moned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, by virtue of a bull 
from the Pope, to answer for his alleged heretical doctrines. 
The conduct of the Bishop of London, who was present, was 
that of the haughty tyrannical prelate; and it so incensed 
Lancaster, that he told him, “he would bring his pride down, 
and that of the prelates of all England.” The Duke, however, 
finding himself beaten in the warfare by the Bishop, whis¬ 
pered to one who sat near him, “ that he would rather drag the 
Bishop out of the Church by the hair, than be so used by 
him.” These words were overheard by some of the citizens, 




















SIR JOHN PHILPOT. 


287 


and excited their superstitious reverence for the prelate. Thus 
was generated an evil feeling in the minds of the multitude 
against the Duke ; and shortly after, one of those commotions 
so common at that period, broke out, and the mob rushed to 
the Duke’s palace in the Savoy, with the intention of inflicting 
summary vengeance upon him. The Duke, however, was at 
dinner in the city, at the house of John de Thres, and a 
knight having communicated to him the design, of the rabble, 
he immediately repaired by boat to the royal manor at Ken¬ 
sington. The result of this affray was, that the monarch, indig¬ 
nant at the lax discipline which he supposed existed in the city, 
took occasion from this and other lesser delinquencies, to punish 
the city, by depriving the Mayor and several of the aldermen 
of their offices, and appointing others in their stead. 

It was about this time that the city began to understand the 
value of a strong mind like that of John Philpot, who, at this 
time, appears to have held no civic dignity. Death, that fell 
destroyer, who lays his icy hand on the “sceptre and crown” 
as fearlessly as on the “ poor crooked scythe and spade,” 
summoned King Edward III. to a narrower house than his 
palace at Sheen. While he lay on his death bed, the citizens 
finding the monarch past hope of recovery, appointed a depu¬ 
tation to wait on his grandson, the heir apparent, (afterwards 
Richard II.) Of this deputation, John Philpot was appointed 
spokesman, who acquainted the prince, “ that in all probabi¬ 
lity, their good and gracious sovereign, his grandfather, was 
now expiring, having all the symptoms of death attending him; 
wherefore, they humbly besought his Royal Highness’s favour 
and protection to their city, ‘his chamber assuring him, that 
they were not only ready to devote their fortunes to his service, 
but upon occasion, their lives also ; and, expressing their great 
concern for his remoteness from the city, humbly begged he 
would be pleased to come and reside amongst them ; and like¬ 
wise prayed, that he would be graciously pleased to interpose 
for the better accommodating all differences between the Duke 
and them. 




















288 


SIR JOHN PHILPOT. 


This appeal seems to have produced the desired effect; for 
the young king, shortly afterwards, sent the Lord Latimer and 
others, “ to assure the citizens, in his name, of the great respect 
he bore their city, and of his speedy return, according to their 
desire, to reside there ; and that he had, according to their re¬ 
quest, spoken to his uncle, the Duke of Lancaster, in their behalf, 
who had readily submitted all differences between himself and 
the citizens to his determination, and he therefore hoped they 
would do the same on their part, not doubting, but that he 
should happily accommodate all matters between them and the 
Duke.” 

The differences between the city and the young monarch, or 
rather the more powerful Duke of Lancaster, having been thus 
adjusted, Richard II. made his entree into the city, in a state 
of magnificence and pomp, that formed a sad mockery, by way 
of prelude, to the sufferings of his after life. Mounted upon a 
splendid charger, and followed by the choicest of his nobles, 
amongst whom were the Duke of Lancaster, Lord High Steward 
of the kingdom, Lord Piercey, Earl Marshal of England, Sir 
Simon Burley, bearing the sword of state, and Sir Nicholas 
Bond, leading the king’s horse, he set out for the city. A 
numerous train of youthful citizens, about the age of the king 
(who was then only eleven years old) followed ; each division 
preceded by trumpets, the blasts of which heralded their 
approach. 

At the entrance of the city, the royal cavalcade was re¬ 
ceived by the Lord Mayor, aldermen, and citizens, with the 
utmost pomp and magnificence. A stately pageant was erected 
in Cheapside, in the form of a castle, out of which flowed 
streams of wine, during the royal progress through the city. 
Four beautiful young ladies, about the age of his majesty, 
served up this wine in golden cups to the king and the no¬ 
bility ; they also scattered golden leaves on the head of the 
youthful monarch, and dispensed “ largesse” amongst the 
crowd, in the shape of florins, “ resembling gold.” The Duke 
of Lancaster, as well as the princes of the blood royal, and the 


















SIR JOHN PHILPOT. 


289 


nobility, were assiduous in their attentions to the citizens, and 
lavish in their assurances of friendship and good-will. 

In the following year, 1378, an enterprising Scotch priva¬ 
teer, named John Mercer, emboldened by the defenceless 
condition of the navy and sea-ports of England, levied his 
contributions on the English merchant navy to a very large 
extent. - p . 

s 



































/ 


SIR JOHAN WOODCOCK, 

(lord mayor). 

Among the Lord Mayors of London who have distinguished 
themselves by enforcing and maintaining the rights and pri¬ 
vileges of the city against the opposition of powerful nobles and 
haughty ecclesiastics, may be noticed, Sir Johan Woodcock, who 
was Lord Mayor in the year 1405. 

The conservatorship of the Thames had, at a very early 
period, been vested in the chief city authority. By the thir¬ 
teenth article of Magna Charta, it was especially provided, 
“That the city of London, and all other cities, burghs, and 
towns, and parts of the kingdom, shall enjoy all their free 
customs by land and by water.” It appears that the covetous 
and encroaching spirit of some of the wealthy landowners had 
led to the erection of a large number of weirs, or great dams, in 
the River Thames, fitted with nets for the taking of fish. By 
this means, the interests of the fishermen of London, and the 
revenue of the corporation, suffered, besides the obstructions 
they presented to the free navigation of the river. The com¬ 
plaints made against these wrongs grew louder and louder; and 
though the timidity of many, who feared offending the wealthy 
parties, to whom the weirs belonged,, impeded their removal, 
the time was to come when one bold spirit, regardless alike of 
threats or frowns, should be found to step in between the 
oppressor and the oppressed, to .proclaim that might should not 
prevail over right, but that even-handed justice should maintain 












































JOHAN WOODCOCK, ESQ. 


• 291 


her sway, and be triumphant. Sir Johan Woodcock, having 
received information of the extent of these grievances, com¬ 
manded that all the weirs, from Staines Bridge to the River 
Medway, should be immediately destroyed, and the nets burned; 
their existence being contrary to certain clauses of the city 
charter. 

Arundel, Archbishop of Canterbury, having, it is supposed, 
a pecuniary interest in the produce of the weirs, used all his 
influence to prevent their destruction; whether the young fish 
caught in the nets, were found very acceptable for the diet on 
fasting days of the conventual gentry of the cathedral, is not 
recorded; certain it is, the Archbishop was very angry with the 
Lord Mayor, at removing such a plentiful source of profit. But 
his anger was useless, his threats were unavailing, his influence 
a dead letter. Sir Johan was unyielding; the nets were burned, 
and the weirs destroyed; away went the fish, in a wider stream, 
to supply, at some future day, the wants of those who were 
better entitled to take them. 

A descendant of Sir Johan Woodcock (the Rev. John Wood¬ 
cock, m.a.) not a whit less undaunted in spirit than his ancestor, 
is ndw pursuing the more peaceful duties of a parish clergyman, 
as a “ fisher of men,” in the peaceful village of Littlebourne, in 
the county of Kent. 












ROBERT WAITHMAN, 

(lord mayor). 


The too common idea attached to the essentials of fame and 
its concomitant immortality, rests upon a basis which will bear 
no glance from the scrutinising eye of truth. It is associated 
with those heroic actions which the warrior performs upon the 
arena of human strife, upon “ splendid victories,” and daring 
exploits, by field and flood, on the battle plain, and on the broad 
ocean. And wliat is all this ? A string of fine words to delude 
the thoughtless ; a lie coined by human wickedness to deceive 
the unwary. The foundation upon which all military glory 
rests, may be without, like the tinsel of the dress that represents 
it—a closer scrutiny detects the imposition, and the glitter is 
found to be the result of corruption, like the many-coloured 
patches that, passing from some unwholesome factory, track the 
surface of the pure river. Like the “whitened sepulchres” of 
the ancients—without they are stately and beautiful, but within 
“full of corruption and dead men’s bones.” A beautiful vision 
is the mirage of the desert, as with parched lips and swollen 
tongue the traveller pushes forward towards the living stream; 
but the vision fades before his eye, and leaves him a prey to 
disappointment and regret. And if it were not so, what hope 
would those have, who, by patient industry and self-denial, have 
striven to build up for themselves a purer immortality than that 
cemented with human blood, and based on human suffering. 
The glitter of the slimy waters may not be there; but there is 
at least the pure stream that flows beneath it; there may be no 
visionary rainbow spanning the cataract of human passion; but 






































ROBERT WAITHMAN, ESQ. 


293 


there is the still pure river, whose constant flow, however calm 
and noiseless, accomplishes more for weal or woe than the mad 
dashing of the angry waters, which boil up for a moment, and 
then are stilled. Niagara may astound by its grandeur, but the 
Nile fills all Egypt with fertility. 

One cannot help being drawn into reflections of this kind, 
when contrasting the peaceful tide which runs through the lives 
of many of the more distinguished men of modern times, with the 
boisterous turmoil which characterised the lives of their ances¬ 
tors. It was an act of bravery to smite down a rebel in Smith- 
field, but it was better to devote a fortune for the comfort of the 
citizens of London. Philpot may be praised for his daring and 
adventurous spirit; but the man who fearlessly devotes his life 
to a moral struggle for the benefit of his fellow-men is entitled 
to infinitely higher praise. 

The name of Robert Waithman is one that the present gene- 
, ration will not readily forget; and it is one on which posterity 
will, doubtless, pronounce an opinion, and that opinion must be 
a favourable one. Living in a stirring time, when men’s political 
opinions were for almost the first time in the history of humanity 
beginning to receive an increasing development, his life was 
spent in a moral warfare with the hostile feelings of the men 
around him; and unlike many greater men, who have toiled on 
behalf of truth in hopeless fields, and never lived to realise one 
wish of their existence, Robert Waithman had the proud satis¬ 
faction of witnessing the ultimate triumph of those principles 
which he had advocated in early life against such potent opposi¬ 
tion. He planted the seed in his own spring-time, and in autumn 
he saw the first ingathering of that harvest of freedom, which it 
is to be fervently hoped will only be reaped by the sickle of peace. 

His life is a cheering one for those who struggle against 
adverse circumstances; for, from a very humble origin, and an 
obscure early life, he rose to the highest civic honours; and this 
position he obtained, not only without the sacrifice of a single 
principle, but even by the stern advocacy of principles which 
were then to a great extent unpopular. The moral of his life 











































294 


ROBERT WAITHMAN, ESQ. 


is too obvious to escape notice. It is that it is not necessary, in 
order to win an honourable place in the ranks of fame, for any 
man to renounce what he holds to be the truth. It is not the 
intention of the writer to give a lengthened biography of Mr. 
Waithman, but merely to furnish a brief outline of his public 
life. 

Robert Waithman was born in the year 1764, at Wrexham, 
in North Wales, where his parents, who were in very humble 
circumstances, resided. It was his misfortune to become an 
orphan when he was only four months old ; and from this 
period he appears to have been taken care of by his uncle. He 
was placed by that relative at the school of a Mr. Moore. On 
the death of his uncle, he obtained a situation as assistant in 
a linendraper’s shop, at Reading, in Berkshire, where he re¬ 
mained some years. His perseverance and attention to business 
must have been very great; for, notwithstanding his necessarily 
straitened circumstances, we find him established in business 
before he was thirty years of age. He first entered into busi¬ 
ness at the southern end of Fleet Market, from whence he 
removed, some years afterwards, to the corner of New Bridge 
Street, in which house the business was carried on up to the 
day of his death. His political career commenced in 1794, about 
which time, he must have been elected a member of the Court 
of Common Council. In this year we find him moving, in that 
court, a series of resolutions, condemnatory of the war in which 
England was then engaged with the French people, who had 
in their eagerness to obtain a freer constitution, and to lessen 
the power of the crown, plunged into those excesses which too 
frequently characterise mob revolutions. 

Urged on by unprincipled demagogues, they committed acts 
of wrong and robbery, murder and oppression, at which humanity 
shudders. The first French revolution presents a singular scene 
in the history of the world. A mass’ of rulers were gathered 
together by the populace, divested of those ties of morality and 
religion which bind society together, and their government 
proves, what has been well said, “ that a nation of infidels is a 


























ROBERT WAITHMAN, ESQ. 


295 


nation ot‘ devils.” However favourable the disorganization of 
one system may eventually be to the establishment of another, 
and a better, the disorganization itself may be not only un¬ 
worthy of credit or glory to those engaged in it, but even vile 
and infamous. Such was the first French revolution. But 
this, en passim. 

At the same time, we find Robert Waithman still far in 
advance of the spirit of the age, moving resolutions in favour 
of parliamentary reform—a question then scouted by men in 
authority, and denounced as revolutionary and atheistical; but 
now, our notions of right and wrong are being drawn from 
purer sources, and embraced by statesmen and philosophers ; 
as the advocacy of these principles brought him prominently 
before the eyes of his fellow-citizens, so did their estimation of 
his character and his talents increase. In the year 1818, after 
several unsuccessful appeals to his future constituents, he was 
elected as one of the members to represent the city of London. 
The first essay in the House was in a cause which did honour 
both to his humanity and to the liberal principles he espoused. 
His maiden speech, which was delivered in the House of Com¬ 
mons on the 25th of January, in the following year, was in 
favour of a motion for the revision of the criminal code—a 
code then too penal for a Christian land. In every other 
measure which he advocated in Parliament, we find him always 
on the right side. Shortly after this time, the ever memorable 
trial of Queen Caroline commenced ; and the indignation of the 
people of England was roused to its highest pitch, at the treat¬ 
ment of that unfortunate lady. Into the merits of this ques¬ 
tion, it is not our intention now to enter ; and we only allude to 
it, for the purpose of stating, that throughout the whole of these 
painful proceedings, we find him taking the side of the unhappy 
Queen, with a firmness and zeal which rendered him a still 
greater favourite with the nation. He was appointed one of 
the trustees of the subscription, to present Her Majesty with a 
service of plate. On the death of Sir James Price, he was 
elected Alderman of the Ward of Farringdon Without; and, in 



































296 


ROBERT WAITHMAN, ESQ. 


1823, lie was chosen to fill the highest civic office, that of Lord 
Mayor. His conduct, during the year of mayoralty, and 
throughout the subsequent course of his life, was such as. to 
secure him the esteem of all his fellow-men. In 1826, he was 
again elected a member of Parliament for the City of London. 
His activity in the cause of civil and religious freedom con¬ 
tinued to distinguish him, almost up to the period of his death, 
which occurred on the 6th of February, 1833. 

The Court of Common Council, which met on the 8th of 
the same month, unanimously passed the following resolution, 
which, as the testimony of his fellow-citizens, who were inti¬ 
mately acquainted with him, is, perhaps, one of the highest 
tributes which can be paid to the memory of any man. Even 
his political opponents, on this occasion, expressed their high 
esteem of his character :—“ That the Court deeply deplore the 
loss they have sustained in the death of the late Robert Waith- 
man, Esquire, who, by his consistent and honourable discharge 
of his various duties, in the several stations of common council¬ 
man, alderman, sheriff, lord mayor and representative of this 
city, in parliament, has secured to his memory the lasting 
esteem of this court, and of his fellow-citizens. They also take 
this opportunity of tendering to the surviving relatives of that 
eminent individual, their sincere condolence upon the loss of a 
gentleman, distinguished by those virtues which have charac¬ 
terized his conduct in all the relations of public and private 
life.” An obelisk was shortly afterwards erected to his 
memory, opposite his house, in Farringdon Street, where he 
had so long resided, which bears the following inscription :— 

9 

“ Erected to the memory of Robert Waithman, by his friends 
and fellow-citizens, 1833.” 




























AP PENDIX 


A LIST OF THE LORD MAYORS OF LONDON. 


Years. 

Lord Mayors. 

1189, 

Henry Fitz-Alwyn. 

1190, 

Ditto. 

1191, 

Ditto. 

1192, 

Ditto. 

1193, 

Ditto. 

1194, 

Ditto. 

1195, 

* Ditto. 

1196, 

Ditto. 

1197, 

Ditto. 

1198, 

Ditto. 

1199, 

Ditto. 

1200, 

Ditto. 

1201, 

Ditto. 

1202, 

Ditto. 

1203, 

Ditto. 

1204, 

Ditto. 

1205, 

Ditto. 

1206, 

Ditto. 

1207, 

Ditto. 

1208, 

Ditto. 

1209, 

Ditto. 

1210, 

Ditto. 

1211, 

Ditto. 

1212, 

Ditto. 

1213, 

Roger Fitz-Alwyn. 

1214, 

Serle Mercer. 

1215, 

William Hardel. 

1216 | 

Jacob Alderman, and 
Salmon Basing. 

1217, 

Serle Mercer. 

1218, 

Ditto. 

1219, 

Ditto. 

1220, 

Ditto. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1221, Serle Mercer. 

1222, Ditto. 

1223, Richard Renger, 

1224, Ditto. 

1225, Ditto. 

1226, Ditto. 

j 1227, Roger Duke. 

< 1228, Ditto. 

| 1229, Ditto. 

1230, Ditto. 

1231, Ditto. 

1232, Andrew Buckerell. 

1233, Ditto. 

: 1234, Ditto. 

1235, Ditto. 

| 1236, Ditto, 

j 1237, Ditto. 

1238, Richard Renger. 

1239, Wyllyam Joynonr. 

1240, Gerarde Bate. 

1241, Reginald Bongay. 

1242, Ditto. 

. 1243, Rauffe Ash way. 

1244, Mychael Tony. 

! 1245, Johan Gysors. 

1246, Ditto, 
i 1247, Pyers Aleyne. 

; 1248, Mychael Tony. 

1249, Roger Fitz-Roger. 

1250, Johan Norman. 

1251, Adam Basing. 

1252, Johan Tholozane. 

1253, Nycliolas Batte. 

d d 













































298 


APPENDIX. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1254, Richard Hardell. 

1255, Ditto. 

1256, Ditto. 

1257, Ditto. 

1258, Ditto. 

1259, Johan Gysours. 

1260, William Fitz-Richard. 

1261, Ditto. 

1262, Thomas Fitz-Thomas. 

1263, Ditto. 

1264, Ditto. 

1265, Ditto. 

1266, William Fitz-Richard. 

1267, Alein Souch. 

1268, Ditto. 

1269, Thomas Fitz-Thomas. 

1270, Johan Adryan. 

1271, Ditto. 

1272, Sir Walter Harvey. 

1273, Ditto. 

1274, Henry Waleis.. 

1275, Gregory Rokeslie. 

1276, Ditto. 

1277, Ditto. 

1278, Ditto. 

1279, Ditto. 

1280, Ditto. 

1281, Ditto. 

1282, Henry Waleys. 

1283, Ditto. 

1284, Ditto. 

1285, Gregory Rokeslie. 

1286, Rauf Sandwich. 

1287, Johan Breton. 

1288, Rauf Sandwich. 

1289, Ditto. 

1290, Ditto. 

1291, Ditto. 

1292, Ditto. 

1293, Ditto. 

1294, Sir Johan Breton. 

1295, Ditto. 

1296, Ditto. 

1297, Ditto. 

1298, Henry Waleis. 

1299, Elyas Russell. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1300, Elyas Russell. 

1301, Johan Blount. 

1302, Ditto. 

1303, Ditto. 

1304, Ditto. 

1305, Ditto. 

1306, Ditto. 

1307, Ditto. 

1308, Nycholas Faryngdone. 

1309, Thomas Romayne. 

1310, Richard Roffham. 

1311, Johan Gysours. 

1312, Johan Pounteney. 

1313, Nycholas Faryngdone. 

1314, Johan Gysours. 

1315, Stephen Abyngdone. 

1316, Johan Wentgrave. 

1317, Ditto. 

1318, Ditto. 

1319, Hammond Chyckwell. 

1320, Nycholas Faryngdone. 

1321, Hamond Chyckwell. 

1322, Ditto. 

1323, Nycholas Faryngdone. 

1324, Hammond Chyckwell. 

1325, Ditto. 

1326, Richard Betayne. 

1327, Hammond Chyckwell. 

1328, Johan Grauntham. 

1329, Symon Swanland. 

1330, Johan Pounteney. 

1331, Ditto. 

1332, Johan Preston. 

1333, Johan Pounteney. 

1334, Reynold at Conduyte. 

1335, Ditto. 

1336, Johan Pounteney. 

1337, Henry Darcy. 

1338, Ditto. 

1339, Andrew Awbrey. 

1340, Ditto. 

1341, Johan Qxynforde. 

1342, Symond Frauncess. 

1343, Johan Hammond. 

1344, Ditto. 

! 1345, Richard Lacere. 


















































APPENDIX. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1346, Geffrey Wychyngham 

1347, Thomas Legge. 

1348, Johan Lewlcyn. 

1349, Wyllyam Turke. 

1350, Richard Killingbury. 

1351, Andrew Awbrey. 

1352, Adam Frauncess. 

1353, Ditto. 

1354, Thomas Legge. 

1355, Symond Frauncess. 

1356, Henry Pycard. 

1357, Johan Stody. 

1358, Johan Lewkyn. 

1359, Symond Dolfelde. 

1360, Johan Wroth. 

1361, Johan Peche. 

1362, Stephen Caundish. 

1363, Johan Notte. 

1364, Adam Bury. 

1365, Johan Lewkyn. 

1366, Ditto. 

1367, James Andrew. 

1368, Symond Mordon. 

1369, Johan Chychester. 

1370, Johan Bernes. 

1371, Ditto. 

1372, Johan Pyell. 

1373, Adam of Bury. 

1374, Wyllyam Walworth. 

1375, Johan AVarde. 

1376, Adam Staple. 

1377, Nicholas Brembyr. 

1378, Johan Phylpot. 

1379, Johan Hadley. 

1380, Wyllyam Walworthe. 

1381, Johan Northampton. 

1382, Ditto. 

1383, Nicholas Brembyr. 

1384, Ditto. 

1385, Ditto. 

1386, Nycholas Exton. 

1387, Ditto. 

1388, Nicholas Swynford. 

1389, Wyllyam Venour. 

1390, Adam Bamme. 

1391, Johan Ileende. 


Years. 

1392, 

1393, 

1394, 

1395, 

1396, 

1397, 

1398, 

1399, 

1400, 

1401, 

1402, 

1403, 

1404, 

1405, 

1406, 

1407, 

1408, 

1409, 

1410, 

1411, 

1412, 

1413, 

1414, 

1415, 

1416, 

1417, 

1418, 

1419, 

1420, 

1421, 

1422, 

1423, 

1424, 

1425, 

1426, 

1427, 

1428, 

1429, 

1430, 

1431, 

1432, 

1433, 

1434, 

1435, 

1436, 

1437, 


Lord Majors. 
Wyllyam Stondon. 
Johan Hadley. 

Johan Frenche. 
Wyllyam More. 
Adam Bamme. 
Richard Whittington. 
Drew Barentyne. 
Thomas Knolles. 
Johan Frauncess. 
Johan Shadworth. 
Johan Walcot. 
William Askam. 
Johan Hyende. 

Johan Woodcock. 
Richard Whittington. 
William Stondon. 
Drew Barentyne. 
Richard Marlowe. 
Thomas Knolles. 
Robert Chycheley. 
William Waldren. 
William Crowmer. 
Thomas Fawconer. 
Nicholas Wotton. 
Henry Barton. 
Richard Marlowe. 
William Sevenoke. 
Richard Whittington. 
William Cambrege. 
Richard Chichelee. 
William Waldren. 
William Crowmer. 
Johan Michel. 

Johan Coventre. 
William Rynwell. 
Johan Gedney. 
Henry Barton. 
William Estfeld. 
Nicholas Wotton. 
Johan Wellis. 

Johan Parneys. 

Johan Brokley. 
Robert Otley. 

Henry Frowyk. 
Johan Michell. 
William Estfeld. 













































APPENDIX. 


300 

Years. Lord Majors. 

1438, Stephen Brown. 

1439, Robert Large. 

1440, Johan Paddesley. 

1441, Robert Clopton. 

1442, Johan Atherley. 

1443, Thomas Chatworth. 

1444, Henry Prowick. 

1445, Symken Eyer. 

1446, Johan Olney. 

1447, Johan Gedney. 

1448, Stephen Brown. 

1449, Thomas Chalton. 

1450, Niclas Wyfforde. 

1451, William Gregory. 

1452, Geffery Peldyng. 

1453, Johan Norman. 

1454, Stephen Forster. 

1455, William Marowe. 

1456, Thomas Caning, 

1457, Geffery Boleyn. 

1458, Thomas Scot. 

1459, William Hulyn. 

1460, Richard Lee. 

1461, Hugh Wyche. 

1462, Thomas Cooke. 

1463, Mathew Philip. 

1464, Rauf Josselyne. 

1465, RaufVerney. 

1466, Johan Yonge. 

1467, Thomas Owlgrave. 

1468, William Taylour. 

1469, Richard Lee. 

1470, Johan Stockton. 

1471, William Edward. 

1472, William Hampton. 

1473, Johan Tate. 

1474, Robert Drope. 

1475, Robert Basset. 

1476, Rauf Josselyn. 

1477, Humphry Heyforde. 

1478, Richard Gardiner. 

1479, Bartilmew James. 

1480, Johan Brown. 

1481, William Haryot. 

1482, Edmund Shaa. 

1483, Robert Billesdon. 


Years. Lord Majors. 

1484, Thomas Hylle. 

1485, Hugh Bryce. 

1486, Henry Colet. 

1487, William Horne. 

1488, Robert Tate. 

1489, William White. 

1490, Johan Mathew. 

1491, Hugh Clopton. 

1492, William Martyn. 

1493, Rauf Astry. 

j • 1494, Richard Chawry. 

, 1495, Henry Colet. 

1496, Johan Tate. 

1497, William Purchase. 

1498, Johan Percival. 

I 

1499, Nicholas Alwyn. 

1500, Johan Reymington. 

1501, Sir Johan Shaa. 

1502, Bartholomew Reed. 

1503, Sir William Capell. 

1504, Johan Wyngar. 

1505, Thomas Knesworth. 

1506, Sir Richard Haddon. 

1507, William Brown. 

1508, Stephen Jenyns. 

1509, Thomas Bradbury. 

1510, Henry Keble. 

1511, Roger Aichiley. 

1512, Sir William Copinger. 
William Brown 
J. Tate. 

1514, George Monoux. 

1515, Sir William Butler. 

1516, John Rest. 

1517, Sir Thomas Exmew. 

1518, Thomas Mirfin. 

i 1519, Sir James Yarford. 

1520, Sir John Bruge. 

; 1521, Sir John Milborne. 

1522, Sir John Munday. 

1523, Sir Thomas Baldry. 

1524, Sir William Bailey. 

1525, Sir John Allen. 

1526, Sir Thomas Seamer. 

1527, Sir James Spencer. 

• 1528, Sir John Rudstone. 















































APPENDIX. 


301 


f 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1529, Ralph Dodmer. 

1530, Sir Thomas Pargitor. 

1531, Sir Nicholas Lambard. 

1532, Sir Stephen Pecocke. 

1533, Sir Christopher Askew. 

1534, Sir John Champneis. 

1535, Sir John Allen. 

1536, Sir Ralph Waren. 

1537, Sir Richard Gresham. 

1538, William Forman. 

1539, Sir William Holies. 

1540, Sir William Roch. 

1541, Sir Michael Dormer. 

1542, John Cootes. 

t Sir William Bowyer. 

* ( Sir Ralph Waren. 

1544, Sir Wiliam Laxton. 

1545, Sir Martin Bowes. 

1546, Sir Henry Hubarthorne. 

1547, Sir John Gresham. 

1548, Sir Henry Amcotes. 

1549, Howland Hill. 

1550, Sir Andrew Jude. 

1551, Sir Richard Dobbes. 

1552, Sir George Barnes. 

1553, Sir Thomas White. 

1554, Sir John Lion. 

] 555, Sir William Gerard, 

1556, Sir Thomas Oilley. 

1557, Sir Thomas Curteis. 

1558, Sir Thomas Leigh. 

1559, Sir William Huet. 

1560, Sir William Chester. 

1561, Sir William Harper. 

1562, Sir Thomas Lodge. 

1563, Sir John White. * 

1564, Sir Richard Malorie. 

1565, Sir Richard Champion. 

1566, Sir Christopher Draper. 

1567, Sir Roger Martin. 

1568, Sir Thomas Rowe. 

1569, Alexander Avenon. 

1570, Sir Rowland Heyward. 

1571, Sir William Allen. 

1572, Sir Leonel Ducket. 

1573, Sir John Rivers. 


i Years. Lord Mayors. 

1574, James Hawes. 

1575, Ambrose Nicholas. 

1576, Sir John Langley. 

1577, Sir Thomas Ramsey. 

1578, Richard Pipe. 

1579, Sir Nicholas Woodrofe. 


1580, Sir John B-ranch. 

1581, Sir. James Harvie. 

1582, Sir Thomas Blanche. 


1583, Edward Osborne. 


1584, 

1585, 

1586, 

1587, 

1588, 

1589, 

1590, 

1591, 

1592, 

! 1593 


Sir Edward Pullison. 
Sir Wolstan Dixie. 
Sir George Barne. 
.Sir George Bond. 
Martin Cal thorp. 

Sir John Hart. 

John Allot. 

Sir William Web. 

Sir William Rowe, 
j Sir Cuthbert Buckle. 
( Sir Richard Martin. 


1594, Sir John Spencer. 

1595, Sir Stephen Slany. 
i Thomas Skinner. 

1 j3G j gj r jjenry Ballingsly. 

1597, Sir Richard Saltenstall. 

1598, Sir Stephen Some. 

1599, Sir Nicholas Mosley. 

1600, Sir William Ryder. 

1601, Sir John Gerrard. 

1602, Robert Lee. 

1603, Sir Thomas Bennet. 

1604, Sir Thomas Low. 

1605, Sir Henry Holly day. 

1606, Sir John Wats. 

1607, Sir Henry Rowe. 

1608, Sir Humphrey Weld. 

1609, Sir Thomas Cambell. 

1610, Sir William Craven. 

1611, Sir James Pemberton. 

1612, Sir John Swinnerton. 

1613, Sir Thomas Middleton. 

1614, Sir John Hayes. 

1615, Sir John Jolles. 

1616, Sir John Leman, 
j 1617, George Bolles. 

















302 APPENDIX. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1618, Sir Sebastian Harvey. 

1619, Sir William Cockain. 

1620, Sir Francis Jones. 

1621, Sir Edward Barkkam. 

1622, Sir Peter Froby. 

1623, Sir Martin Lumley. 

1624, Sir John Goa-re. 

1625, Sir Allen Cotton. 

1626, Sir Cuthbert Aket. 

1627, Sir Hugh Hammersley/ 

1628, Sir Bichard Deane. 

1629, Sir James Cambell. 

1630, Sir Robert Ducy. 

1631, Sir George Whitmore. 

1632, Sir Nicholas Raynton. 

1633, Ralph Freeman. 

1634, Sir Thomas Moulson. 

1635, Sir Robert Packhurst. 

1636, Sir Christop Clethero. 

1637, Sir Edward Bromfield. 

1638, Sir Richard Fenn. 

1639, Sir Maurice Abbot. 

1640, Sir Henry Garway. 

1641, Sir William Acton. 

1642, Sir Richard Gurney. 

1643, Sir Isaac Pennington. 

1644, Sir John Woollaston. 

1645, Sir Thomas Atkins. 

1646, Sir Thomas Adams. 

1647, Sir John Gayre. 

1648, Sir John Warner. 

1649, Sir Abraham Reynardson. 

1650, Thomas Toote. 

1651, Thomas Andrews. 

1652, John Kendrek. 

1653, John Fowkes. 

1654, Thomas Vyner. 

1655, Christopher Pack. 

1656, John Dethick. 

1657, Robert Tichborne. 

1658, Richard Chiverton. 

1659, Sir John Ireton. 

1660, Sir Thomas Alleyne. 

1661, Sir Richard Brown. 

1662, Sir John Frederick. 

1663, Sir John Robinson. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1664, Sir Anthony Bateman. 

1665, John Lawrence 

1666, Sir Thomas Bludworth. 

1667, Sir William Bolton. 

1668, Sir William Peake. 

1669, Sir William Turner. 

1670, Sir Samuel Sterling. 

1671, Sir Richard Ford. 

1672, Sir George Waterman. 

1673, Sir Robert Hanson. 

1674, Sir William Hooker. 

1675, Sir Robert Vyner. 

1676, Sir Joseph Sheldon. 

1677, Sir Thomas Davies. 

1678, Sir Francis Chaplin. 

1679, Sir James Edwards, 

1680, Sir Robert Clayton. 

1681, Sir Patience AVard. 

1682, Sir John Moore. 

1683, Sir William Prichard. 

1684, Sir Henry Tulse. 

1685, Sir James Smith. 

1686, Sir Robert Jeffery. 

1687, Sir John Peake. 

1688, Sir John Shorter. 

(Sir John Chapman. 

1fiSQ ' r 

( Sir Thomas Pilkington. 

1690, Sir Thomas Pilkington. 

1691, Ditto 

1692, Sir Thomas Stamp. 

1693, Sir John Fleet. 

1694, Sir William Ashurst. 

1695, Sir Thomas Lane. 

1696, Sir John Houblon. 

1697, Sir Edward Clarke. 

1698, Sir Humphry Edwin. 

1699, Sir Francis Child. 

1700, Sir Richard Levet. 

1701, Sir Thomas Abney. 

1702, Sir William Gore. 

1703, Sir AVilliam Dash wood. 

1704, Sir John Parsons. 

1705, Sir Owen Buckingham. 

1706, Sir Thomas Rawlinson. 

1707, Sir Robert Bedingfield. 

1708, Sir AATlliam AVithers. 










































; appendix. 303 

Years. Lord Mayors. 

Years, Lord Mayors, 

1709, Sir Charles Duncombe. 

1752 ^ Winterlbottom, Esq. 

1710, Sir Samuel Gerard. 

( Robert Alsop, Esq. 

1711, Sir Gilbert Heathcote. 

1753, Sir Crispe Gascoyne. 

1712, Sir Robert Beachcroft. 

S Edward Ironside, Esq. 

1713, Sir Richard Hoare. 

1 Thomas Rawlinson, Esq. 

1714, Sir Samuel Stainer. 

1755, Ste. Theo. Janssen, Esq.- 

1715, Sir William Humphreys. 

1756, Slingsby Bethell, Esq. 

1716, Sir Charles Peers. 

1757, Marshe Dickinson, Esq. 

1717, Sir James Bateman. 

1758, Sir Charles Asgill. 

1718, Sir William Lewen. 

1759, Sir Richard Glyn. 

1719, Sir John Ward. 

1760, Sir Thomas Chitty. 

1720, Sir Geoi’ge Thorold. 

1761, Sir Matt. Blakiston. 

1721, Sir John Fryer. 

17 62, Sir Samuel Fludyer. 

1722, Sir William Stewart. 

1763, Will. Beckford, Esq. 

1723, Sir Gerard Conyers. 

1764, William Bridgen, Esq. 

1724, Sir Peter Delme. 

1765 Sir Will. Stephenson. 

1725, Sir George Mertins. 

1766, George Nelson, Esq. 

1726, Sir Francis Forbes. 

1767, Sir Robert Kite. 

1727, Sir John Eyles. 

1768, Right Hon. Thos. Harley. 

1728, Sir Edward Beecher. 

1769, Samuel Turner, Esq. 

1729, Sir Robert Bailis. 

S Will. Beckford, Esq. 

1730, Sir Richard Brocas. 

< Barlow Trecothick, Esq. 

1731, Humphrey Parsons, Esq. 

1771, Brass Crosby, Esq. 

1732, Sir Francis Child. 

1772, William Nash, Esq. 

1733 John Barber, Esq. 

1773, Jno. Towsend, Esq. 

1734, Sir William Billers. 

1774, Fred. Bull, Esq. 

1735, Sir Edward Belamy. 

1775, John Wilkes, Esq. 

1736, Sir John Williams. 

1776, John Sawbridge, Esq. 

1737, Sir John Thompson. 

1777, Sir Thos. Halifax, Knight. 

1738, Sir John Barnard. 

1778, Sir James Esdaile, Knight. 

1739, Micajah Perry, Esq. 

1779, Samuel Plumbe, Esq. 

1740, Sir John Salter. 

1780, Brackley Kennet, Esq. 

4 Hum. Parsons, Esq. 

1 74-1 * 

1781, Sir Watkin Lewes, Knight. 

1 Daniel Lambert, Esq. 

1782, Sir Will. Plomer, Knight. 

j Sir Robert Godschall. 

1783, Nathaniel Newnham, Esq. 

1742 | g* r q > Heathcote, Knight. 

1784, Robert Peckham, Esq. 

1743, Robert Willmot, Esq. 

1785, Richard Clark, Esq. 

1744, Sir Robert Westley. 

1786, Thomas Wright, Esq. 

1745, Sir Henry Marshall. 

1787, Tho. Sainsbury, Esq. 

1746, Sir Richard Hoare. 

1788, John Burnell, Esq. 

1747, William Benn, Esq. 

1789, William Gy 11, Esq. 

1748, Sir Robert Ladbroke. 

1790, William Pickett, Esq. 

1749, Sir William Calvert. 

1791, John Boy dell, Esq. 

1750 ^ ^ amue ^ I >ennant * 

1792, John Hopkins, Esq. 

\ John Blachford, Esq. 

1793, Sir James Sanderson, Knight. 

1751; Francis Cockayne, Esq. 

1794, Paul Le Mesurier, Esq. 











































304 


APPENDIX. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1795, Thomas Skinner, Esq. 

1796, Sir William Curtis, Bart. 

1797, Sir Brook Watson, Bart. 

1798, Sir John Will. Anderson, Bart. 

1799, Sir Richard Carr Glyn, Bart. 

1800, Harvey Chris. Coombe, Esq. 

1801, Sir Will. Staines, Knight. 

1802, Sir John Earner, Knight. 

1803, Sir Charles Price, Bart. 

1804, John Perring, Esq. I 

1805, Peter Perchard, Esq. 

1806, James Shaw, Esq. 

1807, Sir William Leighton. 

1808, James Ansley, Esq. 1 

1809, Sir Charles Flower, Bart. 

1810, Thomas Smith, Esq. 

1811, Joshua Jonathan Smith, Esq. j 

1812, Sir Claudius Stephen Hunter. 1 

1813, George Scholey, Esq. 

1814, Sir William Domville, Bart. ! 

1815, Samuel Birch, Esq. 

IS 17 ^ ^ a ^ ew Wood, Esq. 

1818, Christ. Smith, Esq. 

1819, John Atkins, Esq. 

1820, George Bridges, Esq. 


Years. Lord Mayors. 

1821, Jno. Thos. Thorpe, Esq. 

1822, Chris. Magnay, Esq. 

1823, William Heygate, Esq. 

1824, Robert Waithman, Esq. 

1825, John Garratt, Esq. 

1826, William Venables, Esq. 

1827, Anthony Brown, Esq. 

1828, Matthias Prime Lucas, Esq. 

1829, W. Thompson, Esq. 

1830, John Crowder, Esq. 

1831, John Key, Esq. 

1832, Sir John Key, Bart. 

1833, Sir Peter Laurie, Bart. 

1834, Chas. Earebrother, Esq. 

1835, Henry Winchester, Esq. 

1836, W. Taylor Copeland, Esq. 

1837, Thos. Kelly, Esq. 

1838, John Cowan, Esq. 

1839, Samuel Wilson, Esq. 

1840, Sir Chapman Marshall, Bart. 

1841, Thomas Johnson, Esq. 

1842, John Pirie, Esq. 

1843, John Humphrey, Esq. 

1844, William Magnay, Esq. 

1845, Michael Gibbs, Esq. 

1846, John Johnson, Esq. 















































A LIST OF THE SHERIFFS OF LONDON. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

00, Wolgarius. 

00, Geffrey de Magnum. 

00, Hugh Bock. 

00, Abericus de Yere. 

00, Gilbert Beck, Peter Fit/ Wal¬ 
ter. 

00, John Fitz Negelly, Ernulph 
Buchell. 

1188, Hen. de Cornhell, Rich. Rey 

ner. 

1189, John Herlisum, Roger le Duk. 

1190, Will, de Havylle, J. Bokoynte. 

1191, Nichole Duket, Peres Nevlum. 

1192, Roger leDuc, Roger fil. Alani. 

1193, Will. hi. Isabel, Will. fil. Aluf. 

1194, Robert Besaul, Jukel Aider- 

man. 

1195, Godard de Antioche, Robert 

fil. Durant. 

1196, Rob. Blundul, Nichole Duket. 

1197, Constantine fil. Aluf Rob. de 

Bel. 

1198, Arnaud fil. Aluf Richard fil. 

Barthelmi. 

1199, Roger de Desert Jacob Aider- 

man. 

1200, Simon de Aldermanbir, Will. 

fil. Aliz. 

1201, Normant le Blunt, John de Ivai. 

1202, Walt, le Brun. Will. Chaum- 

berleyn. 

1203, Tho. de Haville, Hamund 

Brand. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1204, John Waleran, Rich, de Win- 

cestrie. 

1205, John Elylond, Edmund de la 

Halle. 

1206, Serle Mercier, Henry de Sent 

Auban. 

1207, Robt. de Wincestre, Will. 

Hardel. 

1208, Thos. fil. Neel, Peres le Due. 

1209, Peres leJuneen,William Wite. 

■ 

1210, Stephen Crassul, Adam 

Witeby. 

1211, Goce fil. Peres, John Gerlande. 

1212, Const. Unienis, Randulph 

Ely land. 

1213, Martin fil. Aliz, Peter Bac. 

1214, Salmon de Basing, Hugo de 

Basing. 

1215, Andrew Nevelun, John Tra¬ 

vers. 

1216, Benet le Seynter, W. Blundus. 

1217, Randulph Ely land, T. Bokerel. 

1218, Goce le Pesur, John Yiel. 

1219, John Yiel, Richard de Wim¬ 

bledon. 

1220, Rich. Renger, Goce Juniens. 

1221, Richard Renger, Thos. Lam¬ 

bert. 

1222, Thos. Lambert, Wm. Joyner. 

1223, John Travers, Andrew Bok¬ 

erel. 

1224, Andrew Bokerel, John Tra¬ 

vers. 


e e 















































306 


APPENDIX. 


Year 3 . Sheriffs. 

1225, Roger le Due, Martyn fil. Wil¬ 

liam. 

1226, Martyn fil. William, Roger le 

Due. 

1227, Henry de Cochin, Step. Bok- 

erel. 

1228, Step. Bokerel, Henry de 

Cochin. 

1229, Rob. fil. John, Walterde Wen- 

cestre. 

1230, John de Woburne, Richard 

fil. Walter. 

1231, Walter de Bufle, Michel de 

Seynt Heleyne. 

1232, Henry Edlmonton,GerardBat. 

1233, Roger Blundus, Simon fil. 

Marie. 

1234, RadulphAswy, John Norman. 

1235, Gerard Bat, Robert Hardel. 

1236, Henry de Cochin, Jurdan de 

Coventre. 

1237, J. de Walbroc, Gervase 

Chaumberleyne. 

1238, John de Wilehale, John de 

Coudres. 

1239, Remer de Bungeye, Radulph 

Aswy. 

1240, Michael Tony, John deGysors. 

1241, John Yiel, Thomas Dureme. 

1242, RadulphAswy, Thos.fil. John. 

1243, Adam de Gyseburne, Hugo 

Blundul, 

1244, Nichole Bat, Radulph de Ar- 

cubus. 

1245, Nichole Bat, Rob. de Cornhull. 

1246, Simon fil. Marie, Laurence de 

Frowick. 

1247, William Yiel, Nichole Bat. 

1248, Nichole fil. Jocei, Galfred de 

Wincestre. 

1249, John Tolesan, Radulph Har¬ 

del. 

1250, Humf de Faber, William fil. 

Riehard. 

1251, Nichole Bat. Laurence de 

Frowick. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1252, William de Dureme, Thomas 

de Winburne. 

1253, Rd. Picard, John de Nor- 

hamton. 

1254, Wm. Aswy, Hen. Walemund. 

1255, Mathias Bokerel, John le 

Minur. 

1256, Wm. Aswy Richard Ewelle. 

1257, Thomas fil. Thomas, Robert 

de Catelene. 

1258, John Adrian, R. de Cornhull. 

1259, Adam Browning, Henry de 

Coventre. 

1260, Rd. Picard, John de Nor- 

hamton. 

1261, Philip le Tailur, Rd. de Wale- 

broc. 

1262, Osbert de Suffolchia, Robert 

de Munpeylers. 

1263, Gregori de Rokesle, Thomas 

de Forda. 

1264, Edward Blund, Peter Aunger. 

1265, Gregori de Rokesle, Simon 

, Hadestok. 

1266, John Adryan, Luke Badecot. 

1267, Tho. Basynge, Rob. de Corne- 

hyll. 

1268, W.de Durham, Walter Henry. 

1269, Willyam Haddystoke, Anke- 

tyll de Alverne. 

1270, Walter Porter, John Taylour. 

1271, Gregory Rokysle, Hy.Waleys. 

1272, Rychard Parys, JohnBedyll. 

1273, Johan Horne, Walter Potter. 

1274, Nich. Wynchester, H. Co¬ 

ventre. 

1275, Lucas Patincourt,H.Frowyke. 

1276, Johan Horne, Rauffe Blount. 

1277, Robt. Bracey, Rauffe Fenour. 

1278, Johan Adryan, Walter Lang¬ 

ley. 

1279, Rob. Basyng, Wyllyam Ma- 

zarer. 

1280, Thomas Box, Rauffe More. 

1281, Wyll. Faryngdon, Nic. Wyn¬ 

chester. 



























307 


APPENDIX. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1282, Wyll. Mazarer, Nic. Wyn- 

chester. 

1283, Rauffe Blunt, HawkynBetnell. 

1284, Jordan Goodchepe, Martyn 

Box. 

1285, Steph. Cornehyll, Rob. Rokes- 

b y- 

1286, Walter Blount, Johan Wade. 

1287, Thos. Crosse, Willyam Haw- 

teyn. 

1288, Wyllyam Hereford, Thomas 

Stanys. 

1289, Wyll. Betayn, Johan of Can¬ 

terbury. 

1290, Fulke of St. Edmunde, Sala- 

mon Langforde. 

1291, Thos. Romayn,Wyll. de Lyre. 

1292, Rauffe Blount,Hamonde Boxe. 

1293, Henry Bale, Elys Russell. 

1294, Robert Rokesley, Martin 

Awbry. 

1295, Henry Boxe, Richarde Glou- 

ceter. 

1296, Johan Dunstable, Ad. Halyng- 

bery. 

1297, Thos. Suff, Adpmde Fulham. 

1298, John de Stortforde, Willyam 

de Stortforde. 

1299, Rich. Reffham, Thos. Seley. 

1300, John Armenter, Henry de 

Fryngeryth. 

1301, Luke Haverynge, Rd. Cham- 

peis. 

1302, Robert Caller, Peter Bosham. 

1303, Hugh Pourt, Simon Parys. 

1304, Wyllyam Combmartyn, Johan 

de Burfforde. 

1305, Roger Parys, John Lyncolln. 

1306, Raynold Doderell, Win. Can- 

syn. 

1307, Symon Bolet, Godfrey de la 

Conduyt. 

1308, Nicholas Pygotte, Myghell 

Drury. 

1309, Wyllyam Basynge, John But¬ 

ler. 


Y’ears. Sheriffs. 

1310, James of St. Edmunde, Roger 

Palmer. 

1311, Symon Scroppe, Peter Blac- 

nay. 

1312, Symon Merwode, Rych. Wyl- 

forde. 

1313, JohnLambyn,AdamLutekyn. 

1314, Adam Burden, Hugh Gayton. 

1315, Stephan of Abyngdone, Ha¬ 

monde Chykwell. 

1316, Hamonde Goodchepe, Wyl¬ 

lyam Redynge. 

1317, Wyllyam Caston, Rauffe Pal¬ 

mer. 

1318, Johan Pryoure, Wm. Fur- 

neure. 

1319, Johan Pontenay, John Dal- 

lynge. 

1320, Symon Abyngdon, Johan 

Preston. 

1321, Reynolde at Conduyt, Wyl¬ 

lyam Prodham. 

1322, Rych. Constantyne, Rich. 

Hakeney. 

1323, Johan Grantham, Rych. of 

Ely. 

1324, Adam Salisbury, Johan of 

Oxynforde. 

1325, Benet of Fulham, Johan Caus- 

ton. 

1326, Gylbert Moordon, Johan Cot¬ 

ton. 

1327, Henry Darcy, Johan Ilaw- 

teyne. 

1328, Sym. Fraunces, Hen. Comb- 

martyne. 

1329, RychardLazar,tlenry Gysors. 

1330, Robert of Ely, Tho. Harworde. 

1331, Johan Mockynge, Andrew 

Awbry. 

1332, Nicholas Pyke, Johan Hus¬ 

band. 

1333, Johan Hamonde, Wyll. Han- 

sarde. 

1334, Johan Kingston, Walter 

Turke. 





































308 


APPENDIX. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1335; Walter Mordon, Richard Up¬ 
ton. 

1336, Wyllyam Brykelsworthe, Jo¬ 

han Northall. 

1337, Walter Neale, Nych. Crane. 

1338, Wyll. Pountfreyt, Hugh Mar- 

bre. 

1339, Wyll. Thorney, Roger For- 

sham. 

1340, Adam Lucas, Bartho. Marres. 

1341, Rd. Berkyng, Johan Rockys- j 

lec. 

1342, Johan Luskyn, Rd. Ivy sly ng- ! 

bury. 

1343, Johan Stewarde, Johan Aley- 

sham. 

1344, Geffrey Wychyngham, Thos. 

Legge. 

1345, Edm. Hempnall, Joh. Glou- 

ceter. 

1346, Johan Croydon, W. Clopton. 

1347, Adam Bramson, Rd. Besyng- 

stoke. 

1348, Henry Pycarde, Symond Dol- 

. sely. 

1349, Adam Bury, Rauffe Lynne. 

1350, Johan Notte, Wyll.Worcestre. 

1351, Johan Wrothe, Gylbert Steyn- 

drope. 

1352, JohanPeclie, JohanStodeney. 

1353, Johan Welde, Johan Lytell. 

1354, Will. Totyngham, Rd. Smert. 

1355, Thos. Forster, Thos. Brandon. 

1356, Richard Notyngham, Thomas 

Dosell. 

1357, Stephen Caundyshe, Bartyl- 

mewe Frestelyng. 

1358, Johan Bernes, Johan Buryn. 

1359, Symond de Benyngton, Johan 

Chy Chester. 

1360, Johan Denys, Walter Borney. 

1361, Wyllyam Holbeeh, James 

Tame. 

1362, John of St. Albones, James 

Andrew. 

1363, Rich.Croydon, John Hyltoste. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1364, Johan of Mertforde, Symond 

de Mordon. 

1365, Johan Bykylsworth, Johan 

Yrelande. 

1366, Johan Warde,Wyll. Dykman. 

1367, Johan Tergolde, Wyll. Dyk¬ 

man. 

1368, Amd. Wymbyrgham, Rob. 

Gyrdeler. 

1369, Johan Pyell, Hugh Holdyche. 

1370, William Walworth, Robert 

Gay ton. 

1371, Robert Hatfelde, Robert Gay - 

ton. 

1372, Johan Phylpott, Nycholas 

Brember. 

1373, Johan Awbry, Johan Fys- 

shyde. 

1374, Rycharde Lyons, Wyll. Wod- 

house. 

1375, Johan Hadley, Wyll. New'- 

porte. „ 

1376, Johan Northamton, Rob. 

Launde. 

1377, And. Pykman, Nich. Twy- 

forde. 

137S, Johan Boseman, Tho. Corn- 
waleys. 

1379, Johan Heylesson, Wyllyam 

Baret. 

1380, Walter Docet, Wyll. Ivnyght- 

hode. 

1381, Johan Rote, Johan Hynde. 

1382, Johan Sely, Adam Bamme. 

1383, Symond Winchcombe, John 

More. 

1384, Nicholas Ereton, Johan 

Frensbe. 

1385, John Organ, Johan Chyrche- 

man. 

1386, Wyllyam Stondon, Wyll. 

More. 

1387, WyllyamVenour,IIugheFor- 

stalfe. 

1388, Thomas Austeyne, Adam 

Cathyll. 






































APPENDIX. 


309 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1389, JohanWalcot, Jolian Loveney. 

1390, Tho.Vyvent, Johan Fraunces, 

1391, Johan Chadworth, Hen. Va- 

raere. 

1392, Gilb. Manfelde, Tho. New- 

yngtyn. 

1393, Rich. Whyttington, Drew 

Barentyne. 

1394, Wyll. Brampton, Tho. Knolles 
1^95, Roger Elys, Johan Sher- 

yngham. 

1396, Thomas Wylforde, Wyll. Par¬ 

ker. 

1397, Wyll. Askeham,Johan Wode- 

coke. 

1398, Johan Wade, Johan Warner. 

1399, Wyll. Waldern, Wyll. Hyde. 

1400, Wyll. Wakele, Wyll. Eliot. 

1401, Wyll. Venour, Will. Frem- 

yngham. 

1402, Rich. Marlowe, Rob. Chi- 

cheley. 

1403, Thos. Fawkoner, Thos. Poll. 

1404, Will.Lowste, Steph. Spylman. 

1405, Henry Barton, Woll. Crowner. 

1406, Nych. Wotton, Godfrey Brook. 

1407, Hy. Pomfret, Hy. Hatton. 

1408, Thomas Duke, Wyll. Norton. 

1409, Johan Lawe, Wyll. Chy- 

chelcy. 

1410, Johan Penne, Thomas Pyke. 

1411, Johan Raynewell, Wyll. Cot¬ 

ton. 

1412, Rauf Levenhem, Wyll. Sevy- 

nok. 

1413, Johan Sutton, Johan Micoll. 

1414, Johan Mychell, Thos. Aleyn. 

1415, Aleyn Everard, Th. Cam' 

brydge. 

1416, Rob. Wodtyngdon, Johan Co- 

ventre. 

1417, Henry Rede, Johan Gedney. 

1418, Johan Bryan, llauffe Barton, 

Johan Parnasse. 

1419, Rob. Whytingham, Johan 

Butler. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1 420, Johan Boteler, Wyll. Weston. 

1421, Rich. Gosselyn,Wyll. Weston. 

1422, Wm. Estfelde, Rob. Tatersale- 

1423, Nych. James, Th. Wadeforde. 

1424, Symon Seman, John By water. 

1425, Wyll. Mylred, Johan Brokle. 

1426, Johan Arnold, Johan 

Hygham. 

1427, Henry Frowick, Robert Otley. 

1428, Tho. Duffhouse, Rauffe Ho- 

land. 

1429, Johan Ruffe, Rauffe Holand. 

1430, Water Chertsey, Robt. Large 

1431, Johan Addyrlee, Step. Browne 

1432, Johan Olney, Johan Pad- 

dysley. 

1433, Thos. Chalton, Johan Lynge- 

1434, Thos. Bernwell, SimondEyer. 

1435, Thos. Catworth, Robt. Clop- 

ton. 

1436, Thos. Morsted, Wyll. Gre¬ 

gory. 

1437, Wyll. Chapman, Wyll. Halys. 

1438, Hugh Dyke, Nicholas Yoo. 

1439, Rob. Marchall, Phylyp Mal- 

pas. 

1440, Johan Sutton, Wyll. Whe- 

tynhale. 

1441, William Cumbys, Rd. Ryche. 

1442, Thos. Beaumont, Rich. Nor- 

don. 

1443, Nych. Wyfforde, Johan Nor¬ 

man. 

1444, Stephen Forster, HughWyche. 

1445, Johan Derby,GeffreyFeldyng. 

1446, Robert Horne, Godfrey Bo- 

loyne. 

1447, Wyll. Abraham, Thomas Scot. 

1448, Wyll. Cantlow, Wyll. Ma- 

rowe. 

1449, Wyll. Hulyn, Tho. Canynges. 

1450, Johan Mydylton, Wyll. Dere. 

1451, Math. Phylyp, Chrystofer 

Warton. 

1452, Richard Lee, Richarde Alley. 

1453, Johan Walden, Thomas Cooke. 



















































310 


APPENDIX. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1454, Johan Felde, Wyll. Taylour. 

1455, Johan Yonge,Thos. Oulgrave. 

1456, Johan Steward, RaufeVerney. 

1457, Wyll. Edward, Thomas Rey- 

ner. 

1458, Raufe Joselyn, Rich. Nede- 

ham. 

1459, Johan Plummer, Wyll. 

Stocker. 

1460, Kych. Hemynge, Johan Lam- 

barde. 

1461, Johan Looke, Geo. Irelande. 

1462, Will. Hampton, Bartylmew 

J emys. 

1463, Robert Basset, Thomas Mus- 

champ. 

1464, John Tate, Johan Stone. 

1465, Sir Henry Wavyr, JamesCon- 

stantyne. 

1466, Johan Brown, Hy. Bryce, 

Johan Stockton. 

1467, Humffry Heyforde, Thos. 

Stalbroke. 

1468, Wyll. Haryot, Symond de 

Smyth. 

1469, Robert Drope, Rich. Gardy- 

ner. 

1470, Johan Crosby, Johan Warde. 

1471, Johan Alleyn, Johan Shelley, 

1472, Johan Browne, Thos. Bledlow. 

1473, Johan Stocker, Robt. Byllys- 

don. 

1474, Edmond Shaa, Thomas Hylle. 

1475, Hugh Bryce, Robert Colwych. 

1476, Richard Rawson,Wyll. Horne. 

1477, Johan Stocker, Henry Colet. 

1478, Robert Hardynge, Robert By- 

felde. 

1479, Thomas Ilam, Johan Warde. 

1480, William Danyell, Wm. Bakon. 

1481, Robert Tate, Wyll. Wyking, 

Richarde Chawry. 

1482, Wyll. Whyte, Johan Mathewe 

1483, Thomas Norlond Wyll. Mar- 

tyn. 

1484, Rich. Chestir, Thos. Bretayn. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1485, Johan Tate, Johan Tate. 

1486, Hugh Clopton, Johan Percy- 

vall. 

1487, Johan Eenkyll, Johan Rem¬ 

ington. 

1488, Wyllyam Isaak, Rauf Tilny. 

1489, Wyll. Capell, Johan Brook. 

1490, Henry Coote, Robert Revell, 

Hugh Pemberton. 

1491, Thomas Wood, Wyll. Browne 

1492, Will. Purchase, Wyll. Wal- 

bek. 

1493, Robert Fabyan, Johan Wyn 

gar. 

1494, Nycholas Alwyn, Johan War¬ 

ner. 

1495, Thos. Knesworth, Henry So- 

myr. 

1496, Johan Shaa, RichardeHaddon 

1497, Bartholemew Reed, Thos. 

Wyndowght. 

1498, Thos. Bradbery, Steven Jen- 

yns. 

1499, James Wilforde, Rychard 

Brond. 

1500, Johan Hawys, William Stede 

1501, Syr Laurence Aylemer, Henry 

Hede. 

1502, Henry Keble, Nycholas Nynes 

1503, Chrystoffer Hawyss, Robert 

Wattes, Thomas Granger. 

1504, Roger Achylly, Wm. Browne. 

1505, Richard Shore, Roger Grove. 

1506, Wyll. Copynger, Tho. John¬ 

son, Wm. Fitz-Wyllyams. 

1507, William Butler, Johan Ivirkby 

1508, Thomas Exmew, Rychard 

Smyth. 

1509, George Monox, John Doget. 

1510, John Milborne, John Rest. 

1511, Nicholas Skelton, Tho. Mir- 

fine. 

1512, Robt. Aldarnes, Robt. Fen- 

rother. 

1513, John Dawes, John Bridges. 

1514, James Yarford, John Monday. 







APPENDIX. 


311 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1515, Henry Warley, Richard Grey, 
William Bailey. 

151f>, Thomas Seimer, John Thurs¬ 
ton. 

1517, Thos. Baldrie, Raph Simondes. 

1518, John Allen, James Spencer. 

1519, John Wilkinson, Nicholas Pa- 

trich. 

1520, Sir John Skevington, John 
* Ivym. 

1521, John Breton, Thomas Par- 

getor. 

1522, John Rudstone, John Champ- 

neis. 

1523, Michael English, Nich. Jenines 

1524, Raph Dodmer, William Roch. 

1525, John Caunton, Christopher 

Askew. 

1526, StephenPeacocke,Nich.Lam¬ 

bert. 

1527, John Hardy, William Holies. 

1528, Raph Warren, John Long. 

1529, Michael Dormer, Walter 

Champion. 

1530, Will. Dauntsey, Richard 

Champion. 

1531, Richard Gresham, Edw. Al- 

tham. 

1532, Richard Reynoldes, Nicholas 

Pinchon, John Martin, 
John Priest. 

1533, William Forman, Sir Thomas 

Kitson. 

1534, Nicholas Levison, Will. Den¬ 

ham. 

1535, Humfrey Munmouth, John 

Cootes. 

1536, Robert Paget, William Boyer. 

1537, Sir John Gresham, Thos. 

Lewen. 

1538, Wyll. Welkenson, Nich. Gib¬ 

son. 

1539, John Feiry, Thomas Huntlow 

1540, Sir William Laxton, Martin 

Bowes. 

1541, Rowland Hill, Henry Suckly. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1542, Henry Habberthorne, Hy. 

Amcotes. 

1543, John Toleus, Richard Dobbes. 

1544, John Wilford, Andrew Jude. 

1545, George Barnes, Ralph Alley. 

1546, Richard Jarveis, Thos. Cur- 

tei3. 

1547, Thomas White, Robert Char- 

sey. 

1548, Will. Locke, Sir John Ailife. 

1549, Richard Turke, John Yorke. 

1550, Augustine Hind, John Lyon. 

1551, John Lamberd, John Cowper. 

1552, William Gerard, John May¬ 

nard, 

1553, Thomas Offley, William Huet. 

1554, David Woodrofe, Will. Ches¬ 

ter. 

1555, Thomas Leigh, John Machill. 

1556, William Harper, John White. 

1557, Richard Malorie, James 
* Aitham. 

1558, John Halse, Richard Cham¬ 

pion. 

1559, Thomas Lodge, Roger Martin 

1560, Christopher Draper, Thos. 

Row. 

1561, Alexander Avenon, Hum¬ 

phrey Baskerville. 

1562, William Alin, Richard Cham- 

berlaine. 

1563, Edward Bankes, Rowland 

Heyward. 

1564, Edw. Jakeman, Leonel Duc¬ 

ket. 

1565, John Rivers, James Hawes. 

1566, Richard Lambert, Ambrose 

Nicholas. 

1567, Thomas Ramsey, Will. Bond. 

1568, John Oleph, Robert Harding, 

James Bacon. 

1569, Henry Becher, William Dane. 

1570, Francis Bernam, Wm. Box. 

1571, Henry Miles, John Bi'anch. 

1572, Richard Pipe, Nicholas Wood¬ 

rofe. 














APPENDIX. 


312 

Years. Sheriffs. 

1573, James Harvie, Thos. Pullison. 

1574, Thomas Blanche, Anthony 

Gamage. 

1575, Edward Osborne; Wolstaue 

Dixie. 

1576, Wm. Ivimpton, George Barne. 

1577, Nicholas Backhouse Francis 

Bowyer. 

1578, George Bond, Thomas Starkie. 

1579, Martin Calthorp, John Hart. 

1580, Ralph Woodcock, John Alate. 

1581, Richard Martin, William 

Webbe. 

1582, William Rowe, John Hayden. 

1583, Wm. Masham, John Spencer. 

1584, Stephen Slany, Henry Bil- 

lingsly. 

1585, Anthony Radcliffe, Hen. Par¬ 

nell. 

1586, Robert House, William Elkin. 

1587, Thomas Skinner, John 

Ketch er. 

1588, Hugh Ofley, Richard Salten- 

stall. ‘ 

1589, Richard Gurney, Stephen 

Some. 

1590, Nicholas Mosley, Robert 

Broke. 

1591, William Rider, Benet Barn- 

ham. 

1592, John Gerard, Robert Taylor. 

1593, Paul Banning, Peter Han ton, 

1594, Robert Lee, Thomas Benet. 

1595, Thos. Low, Leonard Holiday. 

1596, John Wattes, Richard Godard. 

1597, Henry Rowe, John More. 

1598, Edw. Holmeden, Rob. Hamp- 

son. 

1599, Humphrey Weld, Roger 

Clarke. 

1600, Robert Cambell, Thomas 

Smith. 

1601, Henry Anderson, Wm. Glo¬ 

ver. 

1602, James Pemberton, John 

Swinnerton. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1603, Sir Wm. Rumney, Sir Thos. 

Middleton. 

1604, Sir Thomas Hayes, Sir 

Roger Jones. 

1605, Clement Scudamor, Sir John 

Jolles. 

1606, William Walthall, John Le¬ 

mon. 

1607, Geffrey Elwes, Nicholas Style. 

1608, George Bolles, Rich. Farring¬ 

ton. 

1609, Sebastian Harvey, William 

Cockaine. 

1610, Richard Pyat, Francis Jones. 

1611, Edward Barkham, George 

Smithes. 

1612, Edward Rotherham, Alexan¬ 

der Prescot. 

1613, Thomas Bennet, Henry Jaye. 

1614, Peter Proby, Martin Lumley. 

1615, William Goare, John Goare. 

1616, Allen Cotten, Cuthbert 

Hacket. 

1617, Wm. Holyday, Robert John¬ 

son. 

1618, Richard Hearne, Hugh Ham- 

mersley. 

1619, Richard Deane, Jas. Cambell. 

1620, Edward Allen, Robert Ducie. 

1621, George Whitmore, Nich. 

Rainton. 

1622, John Hodges, Humfrey Han¬ 

ford. 

1623, Ralph Freeman Thos. Moul- 

son. 

1624, Rowland Heilin, Robert Pack- 

hurst. 

1625, Thos. Westway, Ellis Crispe, 

John Poole, Christopher 
Cletheroe. 

1626, Edw. Bromfield, Richard 

Fenne. 

1627, Maurice Abbot, Henry Gar- 

way. 

1628, Rowland Backhouse, William 

Acton. 





























APPENDIX. 


313 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1629, Hurafrey Smith, Edmund 

Wright. 

1630, Arthur Abdy, Rob. Cambell. 

1631, Samuel Cranmer Henry Prat. 

1632, Hugh Perry, Henry Andrews. 

1633, Gilbert Harrison, Rich. Gu¬ 

rney. 

1634, John Highlord, John Cordall. 

1635, Thomas Soame, John Gayer. 

1636, Wm. Abell, Jacob Gerrard. 

1637, Thomas Atkyn, Edward 

Rudge. 

1638, Isaac Pennington, John 

Woollaston. 

1639, Thomas Adams, John War¬ 

ner. 

1640, John Towse, Abraham Rey- 

nardson. 

1641, George Garret. George 

Clarke. 

1642, John Langham, Thos. An¬ 

drews. 

1643, John Fowke, James Bunce. 

1644, Wm. Gibbs, Richard Cham¬ 

bers. 

1645, John Kendrick, Thomas 

Foote. 

1646, Thomas Cullum, Simon Ed¬ 

monds. 

1647, Samuel Avery, John Bide. 

1648, Thomas Vyner, Rich. Brown. 

1649, Chr. Pack, Rowland Wilson^ 

John Dethick. 

1650, Robert Tichborne, Richard 

Chiverton, 

1651, John Ireton, Andrew Ryccard. 

1652, Stephen Eastwick, William 

Underwood. 

1653, James Philips, Walter Big. 
1554, Edmund Sleigh, Thos. Alleyn. 

1655, Wm. Thompson, John Frede¬ 

rick. 

1656, Tempest Milner, Nathaniel 

Temse. 

1657, John Robinson, Thos. Chand¬ 

ler, Richard King. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1658, Anthony Bateman, John 

Lawrence. 

1659, Francis Warner, Wm. Love. 

1660, William Bolton, William 

Peake. 

1661, Francis Menhil, Samuel Star¬ 

ling. 

1662, Sir Thomas Bludworth, Sir 

Wm. Turner. 

1663, Sir Rich. Ford, Sir R. Rives. 

1664, George Waterman, Charles 

Doe. 

1665, Robert Hanson, Wm. Hooker. 

1666, Sir Robert Vyner, Sir Joseph 

Sheldon. 

1667, Sir Dennis Gawden, Thomas 

Davies. 

1668, John Froth, Francis Chaplin. 

1669, John Smith, James Edwards- 

1670, Dannet Forth, Wm. Gomel- 

don, Patience Ward. 

1671, Jonat. Dawes, RobertClayton, 

John Moore. 

1672, Sir Wm. Pritchard, Sir James 

Smith. 

1673, Henry Tulse, Robert Jefferey. 

1674, Sir Nathaniel Herne, John 

Lethieulier. 

1675, Thomas Gold, John Shorter. 

1676, John Peake, Thomas Stampe. 

1677, Wm. Rawstone, Thomas 

Beckford. 

1678, Richard How, John Chapman. 

1679, Jonathan Raymond, Simon 

Lewis. 

1680, Slingsby Bethell, Henry Cor¬ 

nish. 

1681, Thos. Pilkington, Samuel 

Shute. 

1682, Dudley North, Peter Rich. 

1683, Peter Daniel, Samuel Dash- 

wood. 

1684, Wm. Gosling, Peter Vande- 

pute. 

1685, Benjamin Thoiowgood, Thos. 

Kensey. 

F f 











































314 


APPENDIX. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1686, Thos. Rawlinson, Thos. j 

Fowles. 

1687, BazilFirebrace, John Parsons. 

1688, Sir Humphry Edwin, John 

Fleet 

1689, Christ. Lethieulier, John 

Houblon 

1690, Edward Clark, Francis Child. 

1691, Wra. Ashurst, Rich. Levett. 

1692, Thomas Lane, Thomas Cook. 

1693, Thomas Abney,Wm. Hedges. 

1694, John Sweetapple, Wm. Cole. 

1695, Ed. Mills, Owen Buckingham. 

1696, John Wolfe, Samuel Blewit. 

1697, Bartholomew Gracedieu, 

James Collet. 

1698, Wm. Gore, Joseph Smart. 

1699, Charles Duncombe, Jeffrey 

Jeffries. 

1700, Robert Beachcroft, Henry 

Furnece. 

1701, Wm. Withers, Peter Floyer, : 

James Bateman. 

1702, Rob. Beddingfield, Samuel 

Garvard. 

1703, Sir Gilbert Heathcote, Sir 

Joseph Wolfe. 

1704, Sir John Buckworth, Sir Wil¬ 

liam Humfries. 

1705, Sir Charles Thorold, Sir Sam¬ 

uel Stanier. 

1706, Sir William Benson, Sir 

Ambrose Crowley. 

1707, Benjamin Green, Sir Charles 

Peers. 

1708, Charles Hopton, Richard 

Guy. 

1709, Sir Richard Hoare, Thomas 

Dunk. 

1710, Sir George Thorold, Francis 

Eyles. 

1711, John Cass, William Stewart. 

1712, William Lewen, Sir Samuel 

Clarke. 

1713, Francis Forbes, Joshua 

Sharpe. 


Y ears. Sheriffs. 

1714, Robert Bredon, Sir Randolph 

Knipe. 

1715, Sir John Ward, Sir John 

Fryer. 

1716, Sir Ger.ard Conyers, Charles 

Cooke. 

1717, Sir Peter Delme, Sir Harcourt 

Master. 

1718, Sir John Bull, Sir Thomas 

Ambrose. 

1719, Sir John'Eyles, Sir John Tash. 

1720, Sir George Caswell, Sir Wil¬ 

liam Billers. 

1721, Sir George Mertins, Edward 

Becher. 

1722, Humphrey Parsons, Fran. 

Child, Esqrs. 

1723, Sir Richard Hopkins, Felix 

F east, Edw. Bellamy, Esqrs. 

1724, Robert Baylis, Joshua Eyles, 

E qrs. 

1725, Francis Porten, Jeremiah 

Morden, John Thompson, 
Esqrs. 

1726, Sir John Lock, William Og-' 

borne, Esq. 

1727, Sir John Grosvenor, Thomas 

Lombe, Esq. 

1728, Richard Brocas, Richard Le¬ 

vett, Esqrs. 

1729, Sir John Williams, John 

Barber, Esq. 

1730, John Fuller, Esq., Sir Isaac 

Shard. 

1731, Samuel Russell, Thomas Pin¬ 

dar, Esqrs. 

1732, Robert Alsop, Henry Hankey, 

Esqrs. 

1733, Robert Wesley, Daniel Lam¬ 

bert, Esqs. 

1734, Micajah Perry, John Slaters 

Esqrs. 

1735, Sir John Barnard, Sir Robert 

Goodsehall. 

1736, Sir William Rous, Benjamin 

Rawling, Esq. 


































APPENDIX. 


315 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1737,. Sir George Champion, Thos. 

Russel, Esq. Sir Robert 
Kendall Carter. 

1738, James Brooke, W. West¬ 

brook, Esqrs. 

1739, George Heathcote, Esq. Sir 

John Lequesne. 

1740, Henry Marshall, Rich.Hoare, 

Esqrs. 

1741, Robert Willmot, Will. Smith, 

Esqrs. 

1742, William Benn, Charles Eggle- 

ton, Esqrs. 

1743, Sir Robert Ladbroke, Sir 

Will. Calvert. 

1744, Walt. Bernard, Esq., Sir 

Samuel Pennant. 

1745, Jno. Blanchford, Era. Cock¬ 

ayne, Esqrs. 

1746, Thomas Winterbottom, Robt. 

Alsop* Esqrs. 

1747, Sir Crisp Gascoyne, E. Davies, 

Esqrs. 

1748, Edw. Ironside, Tho. Rawlin- 

son, Esqrs. 

1749, William Whittaker, Step. 

Theodore Janssen, Esqrs. 

1750, Wm. Alexander, Robt. Scott, 

Esqrs. 

1751, Slingsby Bethell, Marshe 

Dickinson, Esqrs. 

1752, Sir Charles Asgill, Sir Rich. 

Glyn. 

1753, Sir Thomas Chitty, Sir Mat. 

Blakiston. 

1754, Sir Samuel Eludyer, Sir John 

Torriano. 

1755, Wm. Beckford,Ive*Whitbread, 

Esqrs. 

1756, Wm. Bridgen, Wm. Stephen¬ 

son, Esqrs. 

1757, G. Nelson, E. Gosling, Esqrs. 
] 758, Alex. Masters, J. Dandridge, 

Esqrs. 

1759, George Errington, P. Var¬ 
iant, Esqrs. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1760, Sir Rob. Kite, Sir W. Hart. 

1761, Sir N. Nash, Sir John Cart¬ 

wright. 

1762, Sir Thomas Challonor, Sir 

Henry Banks. 

1763, Hon. Thomas Harley, Rich. 

Blunt, S. Turner, Esqrs. 

1764, Sir Thos. Harris, Brass 

Crosby, Esq. 

1765, Brackley Kennett, B. Chari- 

wood, Barlow Trecothick, 
Esqrs. 

1766, Sir R. Darling, Sir J. Esdaile. 

1767, Rich. Peers, W. Nash. Esqrs. 

1768, Sir Thos. Halifax, John 

Shakspeare, Esq. 

1769, James Townsend, John Saw. 

bridge, Esqrs. 

1770, William Raker, Joseph Mar¬ 

tin, Esqrs. 

1771, John W’ilkes, Ered. Bull, 

Esqrs. 

1772, Richard Oliver, Esq. Sir W. 

Lewes. 

1773, Stephen Sayre, William Lee, 

Esqrs. 

1774, Wm. Plomer, John Hart, 

Esqrs. 

1775, George Hayley, Nath. Newn- 

ham, Esqrs. 

1776, Samuel Plumbe, N. Thomas, 

Esqrs. 

1777, Rob. Peckham, Richard 

Clarke, Esqrs. 

1778, John Burnell, Henry Kitchen, 

Esqrs. 

1779, T. Wright, Evan Pugh,Esqrs. 

1780, Thomas Sainsbury, William 
Crichton, Esqrs. 

1781, William Gill, William Nichol¬ 

son, Esqrs. 

1782, Sir Rob. Taylor, Knt. Benj. 

Cole, Esq. 

1783, Wm. Pickitt, Thos. Skinner, 

Esqrs., Sir Barnard Tur¬ 
ner, Knt. 









































316 


APPENDIX. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1784, John Hopkins, John Bates, 

John Boydell, Esqrs. 

1785, Sir Jas. Sanderson, Knt., 

* Brook Watson, Esq. 

1786, Paul Le Mesurier, Chas Hig¬ 

gins, Esqrs. 

1787, James Fenn, Matt. Bloxham, 

Esqrs. 

1788, William Curtis, Esq., Sir 

Benjamin Hammatt, Knt. 

1789, William Newman, Thos. 

Baker, Esqrs. 

1790, Geo. Mackenzie Macauley, 

Ric. Carr Glyn, Esqrs. 

1791, John Will. Anderson, Harvey 

Christian Combe, Esqrs. 

1792, Alex. Brander, Esq., Sir Ben. 

Tebbs, Knt. 

1793, Peter Parchard, C. Hammer- 

ton, Esqrs. 

1794, Sir John Earner, Sir Robert 

Burnett, Knts. 

1795, Sir Rich. Glode, Knt., John 

Liptrap, Esq. 

1796, Sir Steph. Langston. Sir W. 

. Staines, Knts. 

1797, Sir William Herne, Ivnt., R. 

Williams, Jun., Esq. 

1798, Will. Champion, Peter Mel- 

lish, Charles Price, Esqrs. 

1799, Charles Elower, J. Blackwall, 

Esqrs. 

1800, J. Perring, T. Cadell, Esqrs. 

1801, Sir Will. Rawlins, Knt., Ro- 

*bert Albion Cox, Esq. 

1802, Sir Rich. Welsh, Sir John 

Alexander, Barts. 

1803, Jas. Shaw, Esq., Sir William 

Leighton, Knt. 

1804, G. Scholey, Will. Domville, 

Esqrs. 

1805, Jno. Ansley, T. Smith. Esqrs. 

1806, Sir Jonathan Miles, Sir James 

Branscomb, Knts. 

1807, Christ. Smith, Esq., Sir R. 

Phillips, Knt. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1808, Joshua Jno. Smith, Claudius 

Stephen Hunter, Esqrs. 

1809, Matthew Wood, John Atkins, 

Esqrs. 

1810, Sir Will. Plomer, Knt., Sam. 

Goodbehere, Esq. 

1811, Samuel Birch, Wm. Heygate, 

1812, John Blades, M. Hoy, Esqrs. 

1813, Christopher Magnay, Thomas 

Coxhead Marsh, Esqrs, 

1814, Joseph Leigh, John Keay, 

Esqrs. 

1815, Sir Thos. Bell, Knt., John 

Thos. Thorpe, Esq. 

1816, George Bridges, Robert 
• Kirby, Esqrs. 

1817, Sir Francis Desanges, Sir 

Geo. Alderson, Knts. 

1818, Thomas Roberts, Lawrence 

GWynne, L.L.D. Esqrs. 

1819, Richard Roth well, Joseph 

Wilfred Parkins, Esqrs. 

1820, Robert Waithman, James 

Williams, Esqrs. 

1821, John Garratt, Wm. Venables, 

Esqrs. 

1822, Matthias Prime Lucas, Will. 

Thompson, Esqrs. 

1823, Sir Peter Laurie, Knt. George 

Byrom Whittaker, Esq. 

1824, Anth. Brown, John Key, 

Esqrs. 

1825, John Crowder, Thomas Kelly ? 

Esqrs. 

1826, Chas. Farebrother, Henry 

Winchester, Esqrs. 

1827, Andrew Spottiswoode, Chas. 

Stable, Esqrs. 

1828, Felix Booth, Esq., W T. 

Copeland, Esq. 

1829, W. H. Richardson, Thomas 

Ward, Esqrs. 

1830, Chapman Marshall, W. H. 

Poland, Esqrs. 

1831, John Cowan, John Pirie, 

Esqrs. 
































APPENDIX. 


317 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1832, John Humphry, M.P., Rich. 

Peek. Esqrs. 

1833, Samuel Wilson, Aldn., James 

Harmer, Aldn., Esqrs. 

1834, Alexander Raphel, John 

Illidge, Esqrs. 

1835, John Lainson, Aldn., David 

Salomons, Esqrs. 

1836, Jas. Duke, J. Johnson, Esqrs. 

1837, Sir George Carroll, Sir Moses 

Montefiore, Knts. 

1838, Thos. Johnson, Aldn., Thos. 

Wood, Aldn., Esqrs. 


Years. Sheriffs. 

1839, Will. Evans, John Wheelton, 

Esqrs. 

1840, Michael Gibbs, Aldn., Thos. 

Earncomb, Esqrs. 

1841, William Magnay, Aldn., A. 

Rogers, Esqrs. 

1842, J. K. Hooper, Jeremiah Pil¬ 

cher, Esqrs. 

1843, John Musgrove, Aldn., F. 

G. Moon, Esqrs, 

1844, William Hunter, Thos. Sid¬ 

ney, Esqrs. 

























THE 

QUEEN’S VISIT TO THE 

NOVEMBER 9, 1837. 


MAYORALTY OF SIR JOHN COWAN. 

Our records of the Illustrious Lords Mayors of London must 
conclude with Alderman Waithman ; we have chronicled the 
good deeds of those who, having passed through civic honors, 
have also passed away from sublunary cares and are gathered 
to the sepulchres of their fathers. 

The deeds of those who succeed them we leave to some future 
historians, not, however, without full confidence that the virtues 
that have characterized the past will not degenerate in the 
future; but that honor, integrity, liberality, and an uncompro¬ 
mising maintenance of the liberties of our noble city will still 
continue to distinguish the Lord Mayors of London. 

We cannot close our volume without detailing an event of 
our own times, shewing that the magnificence and splendour of 
the Ancient City, so often recorded in the pages of its history 
is not without parallel in modern times. We refer to the visit 
of Her Most Gracious Majesty, Queen Victoria, on the 9th 
November, 1837. 

It having been customary, for many ages, to invite the 
Sovereign, at the commencement of a new reign, to a civic 
banquet at Guildhall, her majesty, Queen Victoria, was invited 
to honour the city of London with her presence on Lord 








CITY, 























THE QUEEN S VISIT TO THE CITY. 


319 


Mayor’s day, the 9th of November, 1837. The invitation 
being graciously accepted, the corporation made every effort 
to receive their sovereign with the magnificence befitting the 
great city which gave the entertainment, and the queen who 
deigned to partake of it. The inhabitants of the metropolis, 
generally, vied with the corporation in their endeavours to give 
a splendid and hearty welcome to her majesty, in this her first 
public progress through the capital of the empire. The queen 
proceeded in state from Buckingham Palace to the Guildhall; 
and along the whole line of procession the inhabitants of the 
houses ornamented their windows with flags and evergreens ; 
and hundreds of thousands of spectators lined the streets, <and 
filled all the balconies, windows, and even housetops, that com¬ 
manded a view of the cavalcade. The following is the order of 
the royal procession, which left Buckingham Palace at two 
o’clock, and reached the Guildhall about twenty minutes after 
three :— 


Detachment of Life Guards. 

The Duchess of Kent and Attendants, 

Baroness Lehzen, Lady Flora Hastings, &c., 

In her Royal Highness’s carriage, drawn by six horses, 

With her proper escort of Life Guards. 

The Duchess of Gloucester and Attendants, 

Lady Georgiana Bathurst, Sir Samuel Higgins, &c., 

I n her Royal' Highness’s two carriages, each drawn by six horses, 
With her proper escort of Life Guards. 

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Attendants. 
Colonel Iveate, Baroness D’Ahlefeldt, &c., 

In their Royal Highnesss’ two carriages, each drawn by six 
horses, with their proper escort of Life Guards. 

The Duke of Sussex and Attendants, 

In his Royal Highness’s carriage, drawn by six horses, 

With his proper escort of Life Guards. 

HER MAJESTY’S CARRIAGES. 

Each drawn by Six Horses. 

Two Grooms'! The First Carriage, /Two Grooms 

walking, j Drawn by Six Greys, conveying \ walking. 
Gentleman Usher of the Sword of State, Hon. Frederick Byng, 
Gentleman Usher of the Privy Chamber, Thos. Martins, Esq., 
Exon of the Yeomen of the Guard, S. Hancock, Esq. 





































320 the queen’s visit to the city. 


Two Grooms i The Second Carriage, J Two Grooms 

walking, f Drawn by Six Bays, conveying ( walking. 

Equerry in Waiting. 

Page of Honour in Waiting. 

Groom in Waiting, Sir Henry Seton. 

Silver Stick, Col. Greenwood. 


Two Grooms ) The Third Carriage, / Two Grooms 

walking. J Drawn by Six Bays, conveying ( walking. 
Treasurer of the Household, the Earl of Surrey. 

Clerk Marshal, Colonel Cavendish. 
Yice-Chamberlain, Lord Charles Fitzroy. 

Comptroller of the Household, Hon. George Steven Byng. 

Two Grooms J The Fourth Carriage, j Two Grooms 

walking. $ Drawn by Six Bays, conveying ( walking. 

Lord in Waiting, Lord Lilford. 

Captain of the Yeomen of the Guard, the Earl of Ilchester. 
Captain of the Gentlemen at Arms, Lord Foley. 

Master of the Buck Hounds, the Earl of Errol. 


Two Grooms ^ The Fifth Carriage, S Two Grooms 
walking. $ Drawn by Six Bays, conveying £ walking. 
Maid of Honour, Miss Cocks. 

Bedchamber Woman, Hon. Mrs. George Campbell. 

Earl Marshal, the Duke of Norfolk. 

Gold Stick, Lord Cambermere. 


Two Grooms I The Sixth Carriage, $ Two Grooms 

walking. $ Drawn by Six Bays, conveying \ walking. 
Lady of the Bedchamber, the Countess of Mulgrave. 

Maid of Honour in Waiting, Miss Cavendish. 

Lord Steward, the Duke of Argyll. 

Lord Chamberlain, the Marquess of Conyngham. 


Yeomen of the Guard. 


Twelve Footmen, four and four. 

Four Grooms I The State Coach, 

walking. ) Drawn by Eight Cream-coloured 

Horses, 

Attended by a Yeoman of the Guard at each Wheel, and 

each Door, conveying 

THE QUEEN. 

The Mistress of the Robes, the Duchess of Sutherland. 
The Master of the Horse, the Earl of Albemarle 


< Four Grooms 
i walking. 

two Footmen at 


An Escort of Life Guards. 













THE QUEEN’S VISIT TO THE CITY. 


321 


The procession stopped at Temple Bar, where the Lord 
Mayor, Mr. Alderman Cowan, presented the Queen with the 
sword of state, which Her Majesty, in accordance with the 
ancient etiquette, begged of his lordship to retain, as it could 
not be in better hands. The civic procession then formed, and 
followed the royal cortege, immediately before the state carriage, 
in the following order, to the Guildhall: 


The City Marshals, on horseback. 


Members of the Court of Common Council, 

In their mazarine gowns, on horseback, each with an attendant. 


James Anderton, Esq. 
Joshua Thos. Bedford, Esq. 
William Hunter, Esq. 


Richard Dixon, Esq. 
William Collingwood, Esq. 
W. A. Peacock, Esq. (Dep). 


Sheriffs, 

In their scarlet gowns and chains, on horseback, each attended by a ser¬ 
geant and a groom. 

Moses Montefiore, Esq. | George Carroll, Esq. 


Aldermen, 

In their scarlet gowns, those passed the chair in their chains, on horseback, 
each attended by a beadle and a groom. 


John Humphery, Esq., M.P. 
Thomas Wood, Esq. 

W. T. Copeland, Esq., M.P. 
Charles Farebrother, Esq. 
Sir John Key, Bart. 
Matthias Prime Lucas, Esq. 
Sir William Heygate, Bart. 
James White, Esq. 


James Harmer, Esq. 

Henry Winchester, Esq. 

Sir Peter Laurie. 

W. Thompson, Esq., M.P. 
William Venables, Esq. 
Matthew Wood, Esq., M.P. 
Sir Claudius Stephen Hunter, 
Bart. 


Three Footmen in } Alderman Kelly, late j Three Footmen in 

State Liveries. S Lord Mayor. X State Liveries. 


The Common Crier, 
on horseback. 


The Swordbearer, 
on horseback. 


Samuel Beddome, Esq., Charles William Hick, Esq., 

carrying the City Mace. with the Cap of Maintenance. 

Three Footmen in > The Rt. Hon. the Lord l Three Footmen in 

State Liveries. £ Mayor, Alderman Cowan, ( State Liveries. 

In crimson velvet robe and collar of SS, on horseback, bearing the 
City Sword of State immediately before. 


Her Majesty was greeted by the assembled multitudes with 
the most enthusiastic applause. We have read in the annals of 
“ the great city,” how its rulers have, from time to time, aimed 
to excel each other in giving a reception to royalty that should 






































322 the queen’s visit to the city. 

surpass all that had gone before ; but it is difficult to conceive 
an enthusiasm more intense than that which seemed to actuate 
the “rulers of the feast” on this interesting occasion. The 
Guildhall presented a magnificent scene. The splendour of the 
plate, made more manifest by the brilliancy of the illuminated 
room, seemed to outvie Eastern magnificence, or even the fabled 
grandeur depicted in the “ Arabian Nights.” 

Seven hundred persons sat down to dinner. After the ban¬ 
quet, the Lord Mayor, Alderman Cowan, was raised to the 
dignity of a baronet, and the sheriffs, Moses Montefiore, Esq. 
and George Carroll, Esq., were knighted. 

The youthful Queen of England, so lately raised to the throne 
of her ancestors, had in that assembly a foundation for confidence 
in the loyalty and patriotism of her people, not often the lot of 
crowned heads to realise. 

Her Majesty once more visited the City, in October, 1844, 
for the purpose of opening the New Royal Exchange; * when 
the citizens again displayed their loyalty and devotedness to 
Her Majesty. 

May Victoria the First ever experience the loyalty and pa¬ 
triotism of her people, by maintaining those civil and religious 
liberties which, in one century and a half, have raised England 
to a position never yet excelled, if ever attained, by any nation 
upon earth ; a country “whose merchants are princes, and whose 
traffickers are the honourable of the earth.” 

* Three views of this splendid specimen of architectural workmanship, 
and useful and ornamental building, ore placed, with other plates, at the 
commencement of this work. 




































































) o ^ a o'?' 

%, *■«■•'* a s 

^ ^ * 0 /- C‘ v A 

* ’fK V, <%- 

^ A A - 

7L ^ 

° V> 

/ ^<f> 



° v €. . ^ . 
y o * X * A w „ O /y 

x \ t oN C ^ 
j o * ^vS^cy y 


A 

y * * s s -A . 1 8 < C^ 

r o v a * A* A 
0 t M&bi 1 * %- -A ^ ^ 

^ ^ V °*\A 

x 0 O 

7 <”^' <ir 

*~s~. & a . \ ° 


' o <y 


r\ 


A <1 

*>. * 0 N 0 ^ A° ^ 

"" aO v ^ ' ' 0 /• G> 

^ * WA %A 

* ^S^trW//,h z </> ' z 

« «V> <£> 

» fl v 



1 * 

\v V. ' %\ vv . 

A A* d* * 

f .;%**? *>. 0 * ° 

* S xw. * 

X »*/ #»> <e. 


,\v </>, " r oajf? ' 

*o 

c „~, V b _ **' - 


>?«\N A (,\ 

A * ^ „ 

y 0 » jA A V! o 

/ »<AA % 0- A 

■/“ V * 

o o N 

a 


* a ? ^ a aP^a A 
s" A < y °*-^ A 

0- s * v 1 8 « <$> Av X c 0 N 

0 A ^/rTTri^ 1 'P A * 

' ~ ^ =' 


A \ «* 

**- 9 = 

r\ ^ 


•d C> v) 

xy He. - * A -/ 4 

^ * << - i # ^ A v* ^ 1 

^ ^ \ v a<. ^ 

CV *• v Q.' ri* / »'• v f\7 i. 

O , » a , , D- -A >C. ^ „ -.0 \0 O. v 

°'.A v\' s ”'A"> 0,10 A 

- <J - ■ * ^X'. ^ A .V\ R s#'>. v 

0 7 rv\' no d 

<s- ^ ^ ffsXV&rW'/ v - 1 

Ay cT>^ 

# ^ . 

■>. X 


-»sjr ^^-W- a -o ex -4 ’ d* j ^ Oj 

> , **’>V^/V < *‘VA!r%V**'V 6 

o x o ^ ; 

<■ n 0 C* 4- ‘ 

<0 * 8 I A* > 

\ C‘. V' S 




^ * 





























v* v 


. * * , * a s 


<?‘ r <Y 

X ° ** «y 

A Z * z ,, 

•%. ^ 

o.V ' ”. 


), 0 ^. 


O 


V '^. y ''V^, ^ . 

^ ^ y * , 0 >* ,0° 

' x "> ’"/ , 

r 


- >*, c 

'<■* > 


,=.■ * 


" & +p - 5 

* 'X ,-> » 

r> ^ 


I 7 0 a <■ A *\ ^ , S s a 7 y 0(i.l.A'\ -a, 

'' ? enw^* i ^ 

W° „ ^ * 


c£ 


I 

„•* "' *?W*t '% 0 c A—-',' 

I^. 0 ' ... °.t, »«l'* s .,, ^. *»««’.^. 0 ' *•>■'*. 

7 * ■' s s '/, X .<V „ < * 0 ^ C‘ \ 

' x a"» v a ^ v 

S *.«A= 

^ <?„ - '§lir^ife ,, a ^> 


«>•* V 

o o x 


| ° A ^ o x- 'Vv - v v<^W^ - o? 

r ij- ^ .vl 0 v - . * * , y 

|>* , / v'V ' O 

■ v s. _^.xO*sa f s >• <p Cl s ^gt^Sk^. ' 

* %v> * & ° 0$k' * 

° v .V' %, 2 % .«» \>r * 

. » * A 




^ -a A* s ^8&pJ» 

r •/ o ^ ^ A N c ^ ^ s ^ , i .«, y 0 * * %\' o 

J . 0 s- "' 

*•-'>< . : aV 

. %» P-v" , * 0 O >.. ^ 

S 

V sfi 
t' 
o 



1^0 o 

I ^ 0 °+t+ * » ' ^ " \ V 

1 *%'. ; 

7- 


,A. *7:, y> 1 a ' I' v ' • - A X 

v ' ^ ' • s . ■t' 5 ' ^ 

S ^ ^ ^ # r, 0 ’ ‘O' 

V> ^ S " T /y '> A ' * ' * 0 

*a» .<> /'> -ir aIX a>=ii<< 





-to 

oV ^ ■ (g "y ■ -a c^ ^ s , 

,0^ ^ 7 o o A * , '^i-t. ' 1 fl *- s s A 

^ <,' 1 « * -<f. a\ n c 0 v ‘ 1, *o. ,y 

\ ^2, ^ J -f> JXS » >T^5Xv^' , ^ U < 

O' ^ aII^ ^ V 

* o O' 


<P at> >a 

V . * _s* 

, + >y. A 

^ V 

W H T* . o \° ^ ^ 

L- X^ ^ 0 c V 

T ^ ♦ o N O ° ^ ^/a ^ I I O \^ s » * f 

vy .* •■*!■,•.> 4 o^ va-- 00 ^ % v'v s 

V ^ ^ r ' \^’ ^ 

^ \» r\ 'v^' .! [;'■ ^ 





















































LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 











































